57 réponses à ce sujet

[wsandista]

FemaleMageFan wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...

In a perfect world, where you can have everything you want, and everything done correctly, having Voice is a no brainer. However, because of many reasons (cost, limited amount of voices to choose from, limited amount of dialogue choices, to name a few), the cosmetic appeal of having a Voiced protagonist, does not outweigh the negatives that doing so incurs. A game where every line is voiced, has to make sacrifices in other areas. And that makes it a lesser game.

If the best argument for making the DA series voiced, is that it is a cinematic game, I have a simple solution. Stop making it a cinematic game, and make it a Role Playing game, like most fans of Bioware fantasy games expect.

Cinematics is part of bioware's Strengths. They play a big role,removing the cinematics will give them a big toll

BG and NWN didn't need cinematics to be a great game, DAO was relatively light on them as well. I think you're confusing "cinematic game" with "cinematics in a game anyways".

[Gibb_Shepard]

FemaleMageFan wrote...

Dakota Strider wrote...

In a perfect world, where you can have everything you want, and everything done correctly, having Voice is a no brainer. However, because of many reasons (cost, limited amount of voices to choose from, limited amount of dialogue choices, to name a few), the cosmetic appeal of having a Voiced protagonist, does not outweigh the negatives that doing so incurs. A game where every line is voiced, has to make sacrifices in other areas. And that makes it a lesser game.

If the best argument for making the DA series voiced, is that it is a cinematic game, I have a simple solution. Stop making it a cinematic game, and make it a Role Playing game, like most fans of Bioware fantasy games expect.

Cinematics is part of bioware's Strengths. They play a big role,removing the cinematics will give them a big toll

 
Both DA games have the some of the worst cinematics in modern games. Cinematic presentation certainly isn't their strength.

[ashwind]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Both DA games have the some of the worst cinematics in modern games. Cinematic presentation certainly isn't their strength.

Worst as in? Unless you are talking about flamboyant graphics, Bioware delivers some of the most emotional cinematics imo.

Bioware's strength is in telling stories and not so much in RPG elements nor combat. In DA2, they clearly sacrificed too much in place of making scenes more powerful and emotional hence all the negativity from fans.

Voiced protagonist is extremely expensive to make and the return of investment is slim. But I dont see Bioware backing out because they started the whole Voiced protagonist thing in ME1. Voice protagonist to Bioware is like Open World to Bethesda.

[iheartbob]

If DA is about telling a story rather than the cinematics, then I'd still rather have my own character telling part of the story. But that's just me.

I just replayed Origins and the silent PC didn't bother me, but I still rather liked having Hawke voiced. Maybe that was just the VA though.

[Mmw04014]

I wish I could feel engaged with a voiced PC, but I just can't. I spent so much time during DA2 being frustrated and annoyed by the PC that there was no possible way I could have been engaged.

I never got to pick what my PC would say. We get to make the choice ourselves, sure, but it's never an informed choice. We get a ridiculously short paraphrase and a color icon to give you some hints, but usually these are totally unhelpful because people interpret things in different ways. You might click something thinking you know what the intent is only to find you PC saying something completely unexpected. However, I think that problem could work its way to being fixed by just giving us the full line. Let the people who want to see it access it. It doesn't have to be mandatory, but I will never be comfortable with a voiced protagonist in a Dragon Age game without it. That doesn't exactly fix our ability to choose tone however, which will always stop the player from ever truly feeling like my own. I will always just be directing a character rather than actually becoming that character.

[Zubie]

FemaleMageFan wrote...

Cinematics is part of bioware's Strengths. They play a big role,removing the cinematics will give them a big toll

Really? Most of Bioware's earlier titles, pretty much up until they released Mass Effect in 2007, had no voiced PC's and very little if any cinematics and I think most people would agree that those games did quite well.

So no I disagree with you there.

[Realmzmaster]

easygame88 wrote...

FemaleMageFan wrote...

Cinematics is part of bioware's Strengths. They play a big role,removing the cinematics will give them a big toll

Really? Most of Bioware's earlier titles, pretty much up until they released Mass Effect in 2007, had no voiced PC's and very little if any cinematics and I think most people would agree that those games did quite well.

So no I disagree with you there.

Yes they did quite well for their time. Many of those titles were released only on the PC. The times have changed. Mass Effect was originally released on the XBox. I believe more platforms means a different perspective than the PC only crowd.  Gamers expect games made today to make use of the technology that was not available before 2007. Unless bit mapped graphics and only sound effects with an occassional NPC saying something like Go for the eyes, Boo!  are okay for AAA titles today.

The Witcher 2 has speech. Why should DA3 not have speech? If DA3 will have a set protagonist like Hawke (since many are saying that Hawke is a set character)  in DA2 then there is no reason not to have speech. The Witcher is closer to DA in story and cinematics than Skyrim.

If I can have photo realistic graphics why should the ability for the PC to speak lag behind? Now if you are saying because you can better roleplay then you do not need fancy graphics. You can imagine them. Many go on about how they want the game to look good. Well I want the game to sound good also. That means I want to hear the voice of my PC especially if I can hear the NPCs.

[ashwind]

easygame88 wrote...

FemaleMageFan wrote...

Cinematics is part of bioware's Strengths. They play a big role,removing the cinematics will give them a big toll

Really? Most of Bioware's earlier titles, pretty much up until they released Mass Effect in 2007, had no voiced PC's and very little if any cinematics and I think most people would agree that those games did quite well.

So no I disagree with you there.

Thus you should be very aware that prior to ME and DA (didnt play JE), BG and NWN are using D&D Forgotten Realm settings. Hence, if you enjoy the game for not the story (cinematics limited by technology at that time), you are actually enjoying D&D which is a very matured setting with decades of history behind them.

[AkiKishi]

ashwind wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Both DA games have the some of the worst cinematics in modern games. Cinematic presentation certainly isn't their strength.

Worst as in? Unless you are talking about flamboyant graphics, Bioware delivers some of the most emotional cinematics imo.

Bioware's strength is in telling stories and not so much in RPG elements nor combat. In DA2, they clearly sacrificed too much in place of making scenes more powerful and emotional hence all the negativity from fans.

Voiced protagonist is extremely expensive to make and the return of investment is slim. But I dont see Bioware backing out because they started the whole Voiced protagonist thing in ME1. Voice protagonist to Bioware is like Open World to Bethesda.

I'm with Gibb here. Bioware are way down the list when it comes to cinematics. Not really their fault though, since they have to present a fairly generic scene without too much emotion to allow for a character reaction.

Bioware does good characters, but the stories themsleves are pretty generic. If you like JRPGs they are not as impressive as if you don't. It all comes down to what games you have played in the end.

[Vormaerin]

Trying to put down people who like the Witcher and DX:HR style games as "jRPG fans" is juvenile.

The main thing that DAO and DA2 have done is show that its very, very hard these days to make a middle ground game between the text based and the voice acted games. Neither was successful in pleasing both ends of the spectrum. In fact, the whole idea that DAO vs DA2 success has much to do with voice acting is pretty much a red herring.

A silent PC with voiced NPCs causes a lot of problems, both for the Devs and for the players. It doesn't give Silvius what he wants, because the NPCs aren't going to be malleable to his interpretation of the conversation. They'll be VA'ed responding to tones and implications he didn't intend to have in his version of the wording. On the other, it will leave the pro voice acting types dissatisfied because characters other than the PC will be giving the speeches, engaging in the banter, and so on.

Certain posters are accusing voice preferring players of wanting to ruin the fun of others, but that is nonsense. Maybe if they were over on the TES forums trying to change those games to be more cinematic, you might have a case.

But Bethesda and Bioware are already on opposite ends of the spectrum in RPG design. Technology limits kept they artificially closer in the old days than they are now. Players that think that voice acting supports the kinds of games Bioware tries to make are not trying to rain on others' parade. They are just stating what they like and want more of.

One can blather all one wants about JRPGs, but there are many elements of the jRPG design (anime style graphics, emphasis on teenager-ish characters, a certain level of silliness, etc) that do not make that a replacement for quality western cinematic games like Bioware is trying to make.

No one wants anyone driven out of the market, but if Bioware changes course and starts making the kinds of games Sylvius asks for, who is going to be left in the market to make the kind of games players like me are looking for?

[Zubie]

Realmzmaster wrote...

If I can have photo realistic graphics why should the ability for the PC to speak lag behind? Now if you are saying because you can better roleplay then you do not need fancy graphics. You can imagine them. Many go on about how they want the game to look good. Well I want the game to sound good also. That means I want to hear the voice of my PC especially if I can hear the NPCs.

You're right, I don't need fancy graphics. 

[AkiKishi]

Vormaerin wrote...

Trying to put down people who like the Witcher and DX:HR style games as "jRPG fans" is juvenile.

I'd say more ignorant and missinformed.

It's really down to technology and how technology allowed a certain play style. With more advanced technology this is becoming more and more invalid. Characters are no longer 1 inch (on a monitor) ,you can see expressions and emotions and not seeing them is not really an option (unless you go first person ala Skyrim). Likewise the voice is a big part of the character when you go beyond basic conversation. A character without a voice cannot project, which is why it's left to NPCs.

CDPR/Eidos have taken it to the natural conclusion with a fully realised character that you can still have control over events and conversation through. It maintains the choice and consequence inherent in RPGs at the cost of character creation. But it is by far the best method for cinematic RPG's.As well as giving the character a place in the world and story without any "effort" on the part of the player.
Anything you do to pull back from it will weaken the character and their interactions with the world.

It's a case of taking the game out of the players head (which is only ever applicable to that player) and putting it on screen in the most complete form possible.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 juin 2012 - 08:34 .

[ashwind]

BobSmith101 wrote...
I'm with Gibb here. Bioware are way down the list when it comes to cinematics. Not really their fault though, since they have to present a fairly generic scene without too much emotion to allow for a character reaction.

Bioware does good characters, but the stories themsleves are pretty generic. If you like JRPGs they are not as impressive as if you don't. It all comes down to what games you have played in the end.

Graphics and visual presentation aside =P

As you said, Bioware cannot over do the cinematics because players "own" the PC more, so there is always hits and misses. Take ME3 for example, some cinematics are more emotional and powerful to one player but not the other because they played the game differently and developed preferences.

Take any game or story and strip them down, the fundamentals are pretty similar be it JRPG or WRPG. Japanese likes to throw a lot of philosophy and mystery into their games but many do not like JRPG because the game "owns" the PC not the player. Which explains why cinematics can be done elaborately and easily as well.

My experience with JRPG is like: Discover your character's mysterious lineage; or something similar. Awesome story (though one-sided) at the expense of PC ownership - and after awhile, it is not so awesome anymore...

ps: I am fairly neutral - I like JRPGs too.
 

Modifié par ashwind, 18 juin 2012 - 08:58 .

[wsandista]

ashwind wrote...

My experience with JRPG is like: Discover your character's mysterious lineage; or something similar. Awesome story (though one-sided) at the expense of PC ownership - and after awhile, it is not so awesome anymore...

ps: I am fairly neutral - I like JRPGs too.
 

My experience with jRPGs is that they are made in Japan, while wRPGs are made in NA/Europe.

Many jRPGs have pre-generated PCs(a higher ratio than wRPGs for sure) but that isn't really the defining characteristic, or even a requirement(some jRPGs use a player-generated PC).

Modifié par wsandista, 18 juin 2012 - 02:03 .

[young fox]

Voiced protagonists are bad. It's impossible to craft lengthy, deep and branching dialogue when you have to consider in the costs of VOA's. Silent protagonists are better for immersion, roleplaying and depth.

[wsandista]

su66otnik wrote...

Voiced protagonists are bad. It's impossible to craft lengthy, deep and branching dialogue when you have to consider in the costs of VOA's. Silent protagonists are better for immersion, roleplaying and depth.

This^ 218561561564151561561515618561

[Realmzmaster]

su66otnik wrote...

Voiced protagonists are bad. It's impossible to craft lengthy, deep and branching dialogue when you have to consider in the costs of VOA's. Silent protagonists are better for immersion, roleplaying and depth.

Really?  I guess the Witcher 2 is not as great as gamers make it out to be. I think it has a voiced protagonist. It is suppose to have a great branching story line according to KnightofPhoenix and others on this forum. So I do not think it is the voice protagonist that is the problem.

[Vormaerin]

Not to mention, most of even Planescape Torment (widely regarded at the time as extremely dialogue intensive) isn't like that for more than a couple cherry picked conversations.

[Cutlasskiwi]

su66otnik wrote...

Voiced protagonists are bad. It's impossible to craft lengthy, deep and branching dialogue when you have to consider in the costs of VOA's. Silent protagonists are better for immersion, roleplaying and depth.

Yeah, it's better if that's how you like to play your games. For someone like me a voiced protagonist is better because I play from a 3rd person perspective and it enhances my experience.

[AkiKishi]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Really?  I guess the Witcher 2 is not as great as gamers make it out to be. I think it has a voiced protagonist. It is suppose to have a great branching story line according to KnightofPhoenix and others on this forum. So I do not think it is the voice protagonist that is the problem.

What you have to realise about Witcher2 is that it can do that  because there is no character creation. PST was much the same, you had TNO and everything in the story was written to that end. If they ditched all that three ways to say the same thing and focused those lines in branching the story like Witcher2 does DA2 could have done the same sort of thing.

If you give up CC you can still have the same level of freedom and have a voiced PC. But you can't keep CC and do the same without really upping the costs.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 juin 2012 - 05:03 .

[Realmzmaster]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Really?  I guess the Witcher 2 is not as great as gamers make it out to be. I think it has a voiced protagonist. It is suppose to have a great branching story line according to KnightofPhoenix and others on this forum. So I do not think it is the voice protagonist that is the problem.

What you have to realise about Witcher2 is that it can do that  because there is no character creation. PST was much the same, you had TNO and everything in the story was written to that end. If they ditched all that three ways to say the same thing and focused those lines in branching the story like Witcher2 does DA2 could have done the same sort of thing.

If you give up CC you can still have the same level of freedom and have a voiced PC. But you can't keep CC and do the same without really upping the costs.

Some of the gamers on this forum are saying that Hawke is a set protagonist. If Bioware had not allowed gamers to alter Hawke's apperance it would be as much of an outcry as it is now. I agree that a totally set protagonist would be best for DA2, but then the outcry would be just as loud.

[Vormaerin]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Some of the gamers on this forum are saying that Hawke is a set protagonist. If Bioware had not allowed gamers to alter Hawke's apperance it would be as much of an outcry as it is now. I agree that a totally set protagonist would be best for DA2, but then the outcry would be just as loud.

Hawke is a set protagonist.  Or choice of one of two.   Giving control of gender and basic appearance doesn't make Hawke a player created character.

[grregg]

Vormaerin wrote...

(...)

Hawke is a set protagonist.  Or choice of one of two.   Giving control of gender and basic appearance doesn't make Hawke a player created character.

Well, keep in mind that there are various degrees of 'set'. Geralt has a huge back story, there are, I think, 5 novels and 15 short stories describing what he did before the games.

By comparison Hawke is much closer to the typical 'mysterious stranger' RPG hero. He has a family, he grew up in the middle of nowhere. Not really that 'set' considering that a vast majority of characters do possess a family and had to grow up somewhere.