438 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

Fast Jimmy wrote...
We apprecaite the response, David. And if this is truly the case, then the only plea I'd have left is that either a mod kit be included for DA3 to let players try and take a stab at this experience on their own, or that when compiling/creating resource files, the possilibity of a modder going in behind you to try and do this be, on the most back burner area possible, on your mind.

Well, whether or not it's possible to mod isn't something that needs to be on the back of my mind, as it's a programming issue and not a design one. I suspect that's not something that would be easily left open for modding, but not because we're trying to close it off from player access but out of necessity. But that's just a guess on my part.

Also, I'm kind of giggling to myself on the "and that's about all the discussion I'm going to get into about it." line. Just because it seems like you say that, and then in a matter of hours, get dragged back into a conversation pretty often. At no fault of yours, of course, just seems like that's the way these conversations often go.

This is true. Sometimes I find that if I don't say that, however, that people think I'm up for an argument over it-- I've more or less said my piece on the subject, and ultimately it's not my call. If Mike came along and said "no, we'll do it differently" then we would change the design as we would with any call that's his prerogative to make. Knowing what I know about a system I have a great deal of input into, however, I just don't see that being the case.

[SmokePants]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

"Dear car manufacturer. You used to make cars. Other companies made bikes. Now you've tried to make a bike-car, which is both ungainly and less pleasing. People would prefer you would either make bikes or make cars. Then you would be smart. Like me."

Other people can make snarky, non-sensical and demeaning analogies, too. Aren't we all just special little snowflakes tonight.

Alright, less belittling...

"Dear car manufacturer. You used to make horse-drawn carriages. The modern automobile is an unholy abomination of horse and train and you will smolder in the pits of hellfire over it. However, everyone would enjoy it  ever so much if there was a button to make the cars drop poop in the road. Enclosed is a T-shirt that reads 'I admit that I am incompetetent at my job'. Wear it with whatever substitutes for pride for you godless heathens."

But as long as we're asking for features that BioWare wouldn't be able to stand behind, here's some more!

Text  adventure mode: Turns all the graphics off except for text.

Nude mode: boobs.

Pulp Fiction mode: The story is presented out of sequence.

Happily Ever After mode: Make the culmination of the romance be the end of the game.

Skrillex mode: All dialog is replaced with procedurally-generated dub step.

[Fast Jimmy]

^

...that's the LESS belittling response? It's seems you are running the risk of being flagged as someone no one should really take seriously or relevant for the majority of the conversation.

I think with the definitive answer from David, this request and this topic can be pretty much wrapped up.

[Sylvius the Mad]

David Gaider wrote...

In my experience, people saying they understand the problems and actually being okay with them are two different things. It might be true for the individual, but generally this is not the case. The complaint, after all, is by people who don't like the design direction... they're saying they'd like a compromise because that's all they think they might be able to get, but what they really want is a different design.

But that doesn't mean we wouldn't prefer the compromise to the design you're actually building.

And hey, maybe we wouldn't, but we won't know for sure until we try it.  That's why I proposed the moddability option.  If we can try it, then we can make better informed feature requests.

Do you really think that, if we implemented such a toggle, they'd suck up any gaps between that experience and an actual silent protagonist design and say "well, we've no right to complain since we got what we asked for"? Of course not. They'd say "that doesn't go far enough-- take it the rest of the way."

Of course we would.  That's kind of our job.  We're advocating for our preference, trying to move the product in our direction.

And since no game is ever going to be perfect for everyone, that process never stops.

But you (I expect) don't have shutting us up as some sort of corporate objective.  You're trying to make games we like, and we're saying we'd like it more if we could disable the voice.

And I'm saying there would be a gap.

There would be a gap.  Absolutely there would be a gap.  A smaller gap.

[ianvillan]

David Gaider wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
Its mind boggling to me that the 'limited resources' argument gets used to discuss why a requested feature can't be implemented (like a mute PC or full text toggle) but when discussing a feature many fans protest (like multiplayer), limited resources or "it will come at the expense of something else" are claims that only curmudgeon, stuck-in-the-mud fans bring up, and not at all how video game design/budgeting actually works. 

Again, not trying to be seen as abrasive, but just find it... inconsistent... when two different feature decisions are defended with seemingly opposite logic.

That should really only be confusing if you consider those features equivalent.

Multiplayer is the sort of fundamental feature we would discuss, make part of our strategy, and assign additional resources for.

Resources can indeed be put aside to implement things like toggles-- but they're evaluated with a different bar. Why? Because resources are prioritized by how important they are to the overall game. Considering every toggle we implement we would need to support and test as if it were a legitimate way to play (and this is especially relevant when the toggle would fundamentally contradict the design of the game), it's not an inconsiderable cost... and thus the resources put aside for such a small part of the game are already limited. As I said previously, we're not casting around looking for toggles to put in. This is not Toggle Quest.

Could we put additional resources towards toggles, as we do towards fundamental design features? Sure. But we never will, and anyone who thinks we should has an unbalanced view of how games are designed-- which I wouldn't blame anyone for having, as there's no reason for you to be knowledgeable about such things, but it is something we have to contend with.

Here is the problem for me, I dont beleive that multiplayer is a fundamental feature of an RPG game it might be a nice feature to add that could keep players interested longer, but a fundamental feature no.

The dialogue system has to be one of the most fundamental aspects of the game and you have fans that do not like the voiced protagonist so surely it should be more important to make the single player game the best it can be and keeping to Biowares statement of trying to have the best of both games.

[Realmzmaster]

ianvillan wrote...


Here is the problem for me, I dont beleive that multiplayer is a fundamental feature of an RPG game it might be a nice feature to add that could keep players interested longer, but a fundamental feature no.

The dialogue system has to be one of the most fundamental aspects of the game and you have fans that do not like the voiced protagonist so surely it should be more important to make the single player game the best it can be and keeping to Biowares statement of trying to have the best of both games.

But there lies the difference some gamers do believe that multiplayer should be a fundamental part of the design and it has to be included at the beginning stages to integrate properly with the game. Gaming has evolved into a social function that the Internet has allowed to stretch across distances.

The phenomenon has spread across the genres. So while you may feel that multiplayer is not fundamental others may not share that opinion.

[AmstradHero]

Realmzmaster wrote...

ianvillan wrote...
Here is the problem for me, I dont beleive that multiplayer is a fundamental feature of an RPG game it might be a nice feature to add that could keep players interested longer, but a fundamental feature no.

But there lies the difference some gamers do believe that multiplayer should be a fundamental part of the design and it has to be included at the beginning stages to integrate properly with the game. Gaming has evolved into a social function that the Internet has allowed to stretch across distances.
The phenomenon has spread across the genres. So while you may feel that multiplayer is not fundamental others may not share that opinion.

Correction: EA believes that multiplayer should be a fundamental part of the design. Whether all the developers on the DA3 team believe that is another thing. Of course, we're unlikely to ever get an official (or even unofficial) response on that.

Yes, multiplayer has spread across many genres, but multiplayer wasn't really possible previously due to the lack of infrastructure to facilitate it.

Just because some people like multiplayer does not mean that everything has to have multiplayer. That is a fallacy. That's like saying "some people like first person shooters, therefore all games must be first person shooters." For an RPG involving stories with choice and consequences, a single player game is the optimal means of allowing players to have control and agency within the game. I love a good multiplayer game, but it's not suited to that type of RPG experience, and never will be.

Or perhaps to be more on point - "just because full voice acting is popular in some games, all games should have full voice acting". No thanks. Diversity is good.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 06 octobre 2012 - 08:31 .

[Tennyochan]

@OP
I think it all depends on the cinematics of the game. Yes it worked in DAO or normal dialogue but if they were to up the ante in cinematics or general conversations, do a dramatic scene it wouldn't. Left with a queue sad face, angry face. Don't think the silent fish gaping would be good either...

Maybe just a more detail/refined dialogue wheel so we know what we're gonna say? More no# of characters perhaps? I do agree I like DAOs choices better, I feel DA2s dialogue was... 'Surprising' despite the symbols (which I couldn't remember all)

ME1's consort dialogue choice - 'Give me something more?' (Player 'woot more items/credits!')
Game: queue sex scene
Player: WTF

Modifié par tennyochan, 06 octobre 2012 - 01:38 .

[Galactus_the_Devourer]

David Gaider wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
I have to begrudgingly agree here. We've seen a silent PC in games before. We've seen the silent PC in BIOWARE games before. I'm not sure what about the experience (if we were to get it) would be outside the realm of our comprehension?

Because simply turning off the voice in a game with a voiced protagonist does not make it the same as a game with a silent protagonist. We write for a voiced protagonist. We arrange the cinematics for a voiced protagonist. It's not the same.

So while people are more than qualified to identify things they don't like or things they'd like to see brought back (like a voiced protagonist) -- I certainly cannot question someone's preferences in the slightest-- quite often when they come up with what they see as a solution I don't see that as actually addressing their stated issue. In this case, if we allowed you to turn off the voice you'd likely still say that's not what you wanted... because clearly what you really want is a silent protagonist, not a muted voiced protagonist. And when I say we won't do it, it's because we're not going to go out of our way to implement a feature that won't even satisfy the people who are advocating for it... because what they're advocating for is a fundamentally different game which that won't give them.

I'm not sure how this makes me arrogant. You're qualified to state your preferences, but I think my experience in actually making the system has to count for something. Kind of like the people who said I was arrogant for suggesting that it was indeed my right to determine what life and death meant in the story to characters like Leliana... when that is, in fact, my job and not simply something I talk about on the forums for the hell of it.

To be honest, most of the time I just read the subtitles (faster than listening to the voices) and skip between lines as approporiate. Voiced convos just tend to be a mite too slow. 

[Allan Schumacher]

Here is the problem for me, I dont beleive that multiplayer is a fundamental feature of an RPG game it might be a nice feature to add that could keep players interested longer, but a fundamental feature no.

It's more a "fundamental" feature in that there are several layers to it and there is a lot more to it, including the idea that you may in fact be able to quantify it in a way to receive additional funding.

It's more difficult to take small, exceptionally incremental features and make a reasoned argument that additional funding should be made specifically for that small incremental feature (especially compared to a different, incremental feature).

It's also fundamental in that it's something considered from the beginning and can exist and be understood on a simple level for what potential advantages/disadvantages could be.


Look at Project Eternity, where they've made a pitch for a general idea (which is enough to get people funding it via kickstarter), but deep down the details for a lot of things just don't exist because they haven't been planned yet.

When making a pitch, unfortunately, the idea that the game will allow for full voiced cinematic scenes as well as the ability to have a complete silent and non-emotive NPC is probably not something that is going to get mentioned (and if it was, probably wouldn't be very persuasive when discussing budgeting and things like that).

THe idea of "fundamental" feature is that when comparing something like silent PC with multiplayer, is that the features aren't really comparable at all.

[Tchos]

Until you mentioned this, Galactus, it didn't even occur to me that they might not realise that's what we're doing with the dialogue. Suddenly it makes sense that they think it would matter if a character on screen is gesturing or silently moving its lips when we're not even looking at it because we're reading the dialogue.

[Galactus_the_Devourer]

Tchos wrote...

Until you mentioned this, Galactus, it didn't even occur to me that they might not realise that's what we're doing with the dialogue. Suddenly it makes sense that they think it would matter if a character on screen is gesturing or silently moving its lips when we're not even looking at it because we're reading the dialogue.

OTOH that kind of makes the entire issue of whether our PC speaks or not rather irrelevant. (I'm still opposed to a voiced PC but for other reasons: It's a lot of resources that could be better spent elsewhere) 

[Realmzmaster]

AmstradHero wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

ianvillan wrote...
Here is the problem for me, I dont beleive that multiplayer is a fundamental feature of an RPG game it might be a nice feature to add that could keep players interested longer, but a fundamental feature no.

But there lies the difference some gamers do believe that multiplayer should be a fundamental part of the design and it has to be included at the beginning stages to integrate properly with the game. Gaming has evolved into a social function that the Internet has allowed to stretch across distances.
The phenomenon has spread across the genres. So while you may feel that multiplayer is not fundamental others may not share that opinion.

Correction: EA believes that multiplayer should be a fundamental part of the design. Whether all the developers on the DA3 team believe that is another thing. Of course, we're unlikely to ever get an official (or even unofficial) response on that.

Yes, multiplayer has spread across many genres, but multiplayer wasn't really possible previously due to the lack of infrastructure to facilitate it.

Just because some people like multiplayer does not mean that everything has to have multiplayer. That is a fallacy. That's like saying "some people like first person shooters, therefore all games must be first person shooters." For an RPG involving stories with choice and consequences, a single player game is the optimal means of allowing players to have control and agency within the game. I love a good multiplayer game, but it's not suited to that type of RPG experience, and never will be.

Or perhaps to be more on point - "just because full voice acting is popular in some games, all games should have full voice acting". No thanks. Diversity is good.

No correction necessary because Bioware is EA and vice versa. Also I was stating that one person's opinion about a fundamental design feature is not neccessarily someone else's.. I fully agree that all games do not have to have multiplayer just like all games do not have to be action oriented or rely on a player's reflexes.

[Tchos]

Galactus_the_Devourer wrote...
OTOH that kind of makes the entire issue of whether our PC speaks or not rather irrelevant. (I'm still opposed to a voiced PC but for other reasons: It's a lot of resources that could be better spent elsewhere)

Not the entire issue -- not at all.  A facet of it, possibly, but one which is swallowed up by many others.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

There would be a gap.  Absolutely there would be a gap.  A smaller gap.

I'd quote your entire post for truth, as well as some of your previous ones in this thread, but at the risk of having quote pyramids...this will do.

QFT.

[BLunted]

BrotherWarth wrote...

I know I'm not alone in preferring a silent PC. I just prefer it from a role-playing perspective. And maybe it's just because I'm not a game designer, but it seems like it wouldn't take much work to implement this feature. They could keep the facial movement of the PC speaking to avoid the problem Origins had with the Warden blankly staring at people.

What say you, Bioware?

I agree.

While the last game sucked donkey balls, having a silent protagonist would be one of the things that may help to win me back. Hawke sounded like a pansy and hated listening to him all game. Fortunately, the game wasnt that long....

They could use the money they save from producing the voice into something esle that would help to ensure this one didnt suck as much as the last one. Just give us the origins dialogue options back.

Modifié par BLunted, 07 octobre 2012 - 02:44 .

[Filin2000]

I am sorry, because I do not know English, I am writing with online translator and of course there will be many errors.Ya from the beginning wanted to write personally David Gaider, but it can not be. And since I do not know where to write it, so I'll write here of the fact that often sit out Biovare.

I have here a question.
I heard (this may be a rumor) that the Grey Warden companion announced Dragon Age 3.I now she is married to dopustim.Chto Alistere.Toest it koroleva.To it is the Queen in Dragon Age 3? If not, and it always will see Grey Warden will be a very poorly.I I have one interesting ideya.Ya would like her to tell me personally David Gaider.:ph34r:

Modifié par Filin2000, 07 octobre 2012 - 07:38 .

[The Teyrn of Whatever]

While I'm not particularly attached to voiceless protagonists, there clearly exists a group of nostalgic types who want this feature in their game. Honestly it shouldn't be that hard for BioWare to incorporate a classic Silent Protagonist mode for those who want it. So for what it's worth, here's my support for this idea!

[Tchos]

As well as those like me who consider it superior for non-nostalgic reasons.

[InfinitePaths]

 I hated the silent PC,i couldn't connect to my charather,i miss Leliana,Alistar,Sten,Zevran,Morrigan and the crew,but i had no connection with my warden while with hawke i do have a connection.


The things I really hated was the 3 options in DA2 where Hawke says something completly diffrent than the thing i wanted him to say,and it actually doesn't matter what he says becouse it's always the same:


Suprisingly optimistic/friendly/calm 

Annoyingly sarcastic/joking/trying to be charming

Violent/grumpy/ with no reason

Why can't i have gray options like in origins,Why can't some option be half sarcastic half violent,or some option just neutral,Why can't i have option based on my cunning or intimidation,i hated the wheel.

THE GREAT THING about the dialouge wheel is the question part and the companion option,amazing improvement from origins when i couldn't ask something without turning the dialouge in a completly different direction

[Sylvius the Mad]

The Teryn of Whatever wrote...

While I'm not particularly attached to voiceless protagonists, there clearly exists a group of nostalgic types who want this feature in their game.

It has nothing to do with nostalgia.  it has to do with how our preferred playstyle apperas to be incompatible with a voiced protagonist.

[PinkDiamondstl]

Who keeps digging this thread back up?????
This thread died twice !

[ForceXev]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
It has nothing to do with nostalgia.  it has to do with how our preferred playstyle apperas to be incompatible with a voiced protagonist.

The problem is that you can't just arbitrarily impose your playstyle on any game you wish.  It seems that some people in this thread think the only difference between a voiced protagonist and a silent protagonist is that one makes noise and the other doesn't, but there are a lot more differences.  To do it properly, they would have to make a lot of adjustments to how scenes play out, which characters speak certain dialogue, and of course how the PC is animated (or not animated) during dialogue scenes.

I'm glad Bioware is not considering the mute option because that would be a pretty lame implementation of a non-voiced PC.  It tells me that they still care about the overall quality of their games that they are not willing to do that.  You really can't expect a company that cares about quality to implement a feature in such a half-baked way.  Anyone who tried that feature in the game who did not read this forum thread beforehand (which is like almost everyone in the world) would not understand why the non-voiced PC was implemented so terribly, and they would think less of the game and Bioware for it.  So by all means keep asking for a properly implemented non-voiced PC if that's what you want, but don't expect to convince them to do a hack job like a mute toggle.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ForceXev wrote...

The problem is that you can't just arbitrarily impose your playstyle on any game you wish.

I play every game in the way that I choose.  It always worked in BioWare's games prior to the introduction of the voiced protagonist.

I judge each game based on this merit (or lack thereof).

It seems that some people in this thread think the only difference between a voiced protagonist and a silent protagonist is that one makes noise and the other doesn't, but there are a lot more differences.

No one has advanced that position.

To do it properly, they would have to make a lot of adjustments to how scenes play out, which characters speak certain dialogue, and of course how the PC is animated (or not animated) during dialogue scenes.

To do it so that both styles looked equally good, yes.  But you wouldn't need to do those things just to make the voice go away.

I'm glad Bioware is not considering the mute option because that would be a pretty lame implementation of a non-voiced PC.

Why do you care if the implementation is lame if you wouldn't want to use it?  What does it matter how other people play the game?  What does it matter whether their game settings ruin the game in your eyes (but not theirs)?

It tells me that they still care about the overall quality of their games that they are not willing to do that.  You really can't expect a company that cares about quality to implement a feature in such a half-baked way.

That they care more about presentation than gameplay is not a good thing.

Anyone who tried that feature in the game who did not read this forum thread beforehand (which is like almost everyone in the world) would not understand why the non-voiced PC was implemented so terribly, and they would think less of the game and Bioware for it.

That would only be true if BioWare didn't document the feature.  And, frankly, who would think that a "Mute" button did anything more than mute?  If it did something more than that (particularly if those other features weren't documented), I'd probably be really annoyed.

So by all means keep asking for a properly implemented non-voiced PC if that's what you want, but don't expect to convince them to do a hack job like a mute toggle.

If I can't get the properly implemented non-voiced PC, then I want the mute toggle.  You're saying that if I can't have the perfect game, I should just accept that the game will be terrible.  That's not something I'm willing to accept.  I'd rather have a playable game that has issues than an unplayable game that looks pretty.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 10 octobre 2012 - 03:21 .

[FINE HERE]

I really think that having a voiced and having a non-voiced PC shouldn't be that big of a problem. Some people like to imagine their PC sounding a certain way. Maybe they want their character to have a sweet voice, or an even raspier voice. Bioware couldn't possibly afford a voice for everyone's custom character. There are too many different voices to imagine. A non-voiced PC would be perfect for the players who can imagine their character's voice and read the dialog in said voice.