371 réponses à ce sujet

[Gwydden]

As bEVEsthda and I demonstrate, the first-person approach worked for some players, but only in the silent protagonist games.

No one yet had claimed it works with the voiced protagonist.

*raises hand*

[KaiserShep]

I have doubts about how simple it would actually be to implement switching between voiced and unvoiced. Does the menu system change? Does the PC now have fewer lines to accommodate the unvoiced feature? Obviously, any lines spoken in full view of the PC's face would have to auto-skip so we don't get awkward silent mouthing animation. I don't know how this all works, but I suspect it's not really worth the bother.

[AlanC9]

Yes. That would be clearer.

Colloquial English isn't built for clarity, aye.

Then we could ask why they were building a game for most players, rather than including adaptable features which could accommodate even more.
Like letting us mute the protagonist. Or seeing full text. These are low cost options which would improve the same for a minority of players, and the majority need never see them.

Bio probably figures that the PC's line is the one they wrote, including tone. From that perspective, it's hard to see that hiding the intended tone from the player does anyone any good. (I sure hope the Bio guys are reading this thread.)

I'm not really sure what the objection would be to displaying the full text at the player's option. It might be ugly, sure, but since it would be at the player's option, who cares?

[theflyingzamboni]

Yes. That would be clearer.

Then we could ask why they were building a game for most players, rather than including adaptable features which could accommodate even more.

Like letting us mute the protagonist. Or seeing full text. These are low cost options which would improve the same for a minority of players, and the majority need never see them.

This can actually be answered simply: Because it is a non-trivial amount of work for a return that does not make it worthwhile for the developer. I've seen BioWare devs explain on multiple occasions that toggles are not a zero-effort feature. Muting the protagonist? If they don't want a shoddy half-feature, they'd have to redo every conversation scene to not show the protagonist's facial animations. That's a lot of work. If the player does not mind seeing lips moving without a voice, they can already approximate it well enough by simply turning the voice volume off in the menu. They won't be able to hear NPCs, but that's a negligible concern for the amount of use that feature would get. Why add a feature that you basically already have for the relatively (to the total player base) small number of people who may want to do this?

Full text is another of those non-trivial toggles. You call it low cost, but I can't imagine that is the case. That means that they have to go through a game with probably thousands of protagonist lines, and add duplicate choices for the display text. Not only that, they would have to make sure all of these lines work within their conversation UI. That is not a low time-cost option.

It's easy to say something is a trivial addition just because you'd like to see it in the game, but they're not. Every addition you want (including ones you haven't mentioned) will take extra time for devs to implement, devs who already cram in hundreds of overtime hours. If those feature go in, others come out, because they don't have infinite time and resources. And you ask them to do it because a small number of people would prefer they make a game that is different than the game they are making. The request is neither fair nor reasonable. Keep encouraging them to make the game you want to see. That's your right. But don't keep up the pretense that these "simple" fixes are actually simple. With all the furor you say there was about adding a voice (which I believe you about), you can't reasonably say they are unaware that some people want these things. So by claiming that, you claim that the devs are either lazy or spiting you by withholding a feature that they could easily add. Neither is the case.

[theflyingzamboni]

http://dgaider.tumbl...toggle-solution

This is about a totally different topic, but nevertheless has bearing on why they don't add these toggles. Again, because it takes more effort than the players want to believe it does.

So please, continue asking for the game you want. I begrudge no one that. But don't keep saying the game that is could easily be the one you want if they would just add "low-cost options." It's unproductive and untrue.

[Paul E Dangerously]

http://dgaider.tumbl...toggle-solution

This is about a totally different topic, but nevertheless has bearing on why they don't add these toggles. Again, because it takes more effort than the players want to believe it does.

So please, continue asking for the game you want. I begrudge no one that. But don't keep saying the game that is could easily be the one you want if they would just add "low-cost options." It's unproductive and untrue.

 

Would it really, though? If you're already allocating for four voices, could a "null" voice option be that difficult to implement?

[Mirrman70]

Would it really, though? If you're already allocating for four voices, could a "null" voice option be that difficult to implement?

 

the code for it would most likely effect multiple functions though at that is why they are adverse to "toggles". Say they include it. they then have to test the entire game with all the various dialogue options that one has and then make sure that there are no bugs with the voice, they would also have to make sure every time there is dialogue it shows the full line, which would most likely mean they would have to do something different than the dialogue wheel (even more bugs to test. also what would be the point of seeing your pc noiselessly mouth each line? they would have to cut the scenes of that out of the dialogue as well as make it smooth so it doesn't look like it was cut out. They then have to test these features in every single possible playthrough. Do you see how that would add a lot of time to the testing process? There is already a buttload of content that they have to test, enough that they delayed the game till November. And then what about that doppelganger we saw in that one trailer (can't remember which one), If they share the same voice as us do they become silent too? if they don't what determines which voice they will have? would we have to choose a voice and also toggle the voicelessness as well? Because that could cause issues with bugs causing it to toggle and untoggle randomly.

 

SO MANY "WHAT IF" PROBLEMS

[Sylvius the Mad]

Its a solution. What's your theory on why they don't implement this?

They've actually said that they don't do this because they're concerned people would choose it not knowing what it was exactly, and thus be disappointed by its quality.  Also, they don't think it would do what we want it to do, so we wouldn't like it either.

 

It's like they're worried we think it would be a panacea, and it won't.  But of course it won't, and we'd have to be stupid to think it would.

[UniformGreyColor]

They've actually said that they don't do this because they're concerned people would choose it not knowing what it was exactly, and thus be disappointed by its quality.  Also, they don't think it would do what we want it to do, so we wouldn't like it either.

 

It's like they're worried we think it would be a panacea, and it won't.  But of course it won't, and we'd have to be stupid to think it would.

 

 Do you have a source?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Colloquial English isn't built for clarity, aye.

Which is why I don't like it.

Bio probably figures that the PC's line is the one they wrote, including tone. From that perspective, it's hard to see that hiding the intended tone from the player does anyone any good. (I sure hope the Bio guys are reading this thread.)

That has been their position, yes.  The writers have said that they always thought there was a tone in the silent lines.

 

But given the content in the game (just text), this is obviously absurd.  The game contains only the literal content, not the tone.  The tone may have been written by the writers, but it doesn't make it into the game.  And that's a good thing.  These recent developments are an attempt to fix something that I don't think was broken.

I'm not really sure what the objection would be to displaying the full text at the player's option. It might be ugly, sure, but since it would be at the player's option, who cares?

Exactly.

[Sylvius the Mad]

*raises hand*

You think that, with the voiced protagonist, you have direct control over what you character says and doesn't say, and how he says it?

 

I'd love to hear that account.

[Sylvius the Mad]

This can actually be answered simply: Because it is a non-trivial amount of work for a return that does not make it worthwhile for the developer. I've seen BioWare devs explain on multiple occasions that toggles are not a zero-effort feature. Muting the protagonist? If they don't want a shoddy half-feature, they'd have to redo every conversation scene to not show the protagonist's facial animations. That's a lot of work.

Which is why I've been suggesting exactly that shoddy half feature.

If the player does not mind seeing lips moving without a voice, they can already approximate it well enough by simply turning the voice volume off in the menu. They won't be able to hear NPCs, but that's a negligible concern for the amount of use that feature would get. Why add a feature that you basically already have for the relatively (to the total player base) small number of people who may want to do this?

I'm not trying to fix the voice problem.  I'm trying to fix the paraphrase problem.  And I can do that if I can hide the full lines from the player such that he never knows what they are.  Then, he can play as if the paraphrases are full lines.

 

But to do that, I need to turn off the voice and the subtitles for the PC lines.  I can't turn those off for all lines, because then I'd have no idea what the NPCs were saying.

 

But, fine, don't let me mute just the PC.  Instead, let me turn off just the PC's subtitles.  Let me see the NPC subtitles, but not the PC subtitles.  That would certainly be a low effort fix, but would offer roughly the same benefit as muting just the PC.

Full text is another of those non-trivial toggles. You call it low cost, but I can't imagine that is the case. That means that they have to go through a game with probably thousands of protagonist lines, and add duplicate choices for the display text. Not only that, they would have to make sure all of these lines work within their conversation UI. That is not a low time-cost option.

The conversation UI should be scalable, like it was with NWN and KotOR and BG.  Why we gave up that feature - something we had over a decade ago - I have no idea.

 

My biggest complaint about the wheel is how inefficiently it uses space.  But that's a side-issue.  Would you allow that I could be permitted to disable the PC's subtitles?  That would be terrific.

[theflyingzamboni]

My biggest complaint about the wheel is how inefficiently it uses space.  But that's a side-issue.  Would you allow that I could be permitted to disable the PC's subtitles?  That would be terrific.

It still comes down to a feature that the devs would have to bug test throughout the game, as per David Gaider's blog post. I won't pretend to know the exact time and money cost of that, but I suspect that's the answer you'd get from a dev.

[Sylvius the Mad]

 Do you have a source?

How's this?

I'm not certain how well that would work. We could turn off the VO, but not the cinematics involved... so it would result in a weird pantomime (reading the VO via subtitles, I suppose). There's an element that would definitely be missed, considering what we write changes when we know at least part of the meaning is conveyed via the voice acting.

So, to be honest, what that question boils down to is: "Would you, as developers, be willing to put in a toggle so a player could experience the game other than as intended and in a potentially detrimental way?" And the answer is... maybe? I don't know. Part of the issue would be that any toggle we put in thus becomes something which we have to consider a legitimate way to play the game, and thus have to support (and by "support" I don't mean encourage but rather support technically as well as stylistically). We also have to ask ourselves whether this is something being asked for because those asking for it want the game to be something other than it really is, and whether offering it would actually give them that or just make it a more frustrating experience.

We can't, after all, deliberately put in things that we don't think work very well but use the excuse "it's optional". How many people, after all, might take that option because of what they think it will do, only to unintentionally lessen their experience?

Not being the person who would make the call on such a feature, I can't give you an answer. But that's the conversation I'd foresee. Hope that offers some insight.

That entire thread is extremely good.

[theflyingzamboni]

Would it really, though? If you're already allocating for four voices, could a "null" voice option be that difficult to implement?

Since that alone doesn't solve the paraphrasing subtitle issue that Sylvius has with the games, I'd say this alone would be an incomplete fix. And it's not the null voice that would give them the problem, it's all the animations that now look bizarre without voice. That may not be a problem for people who are hoping for a silent protagonist, but it would look half-assed (because it would be, since it's a partial solution), and people don't usually want stuff like that in the things they create. I know I would not want to leave a shoddy feature in something I created. It looks and feels unprofessional. And I definitely could see some players accidentally muting their protagonist and complaining online about bugs.

EDIT: Basically what Gaider says in that post Sylvius just quoted.

[UniformGreyColor]

How's this?

That entire thread is extremely good.

 

 I was hoping for a link but I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

[AlanC9]

But given the content in the game (just text), this is obviously absurd. The game contains only the literal content, not the tone. The tone may have been written by the writers, but it doesn't make it into the game.

And now we have a voiced protagonist so it does get into the game. Problem solved...... depending on what you think the problem is, of course.

[Sylvius the Mad]

 I was hoping for a link but I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

Those quotes have a link in them.  Top right corner.

[Sylvius the Mad]

And now we have a voiced protagonist so it does get into the game. Problem solved...... depending on what you think the problem is, of course.

Problem created.  There was no problem before.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Since that alone doesn't solve the paraphrasing subtitle issue that Sylvius has with the games, I'd say this alone would be an incomplete fix. And it's not the null voice that would give them the problem, it's all the animations that now look bizarre without voice. That may not be a problem for people who are hoping for a silent protagonist, but it would look half-assed (because it would be, since it's a partial solution), and people don't usually want stuff like that in the things they create. I know I would not want to leave a shoddy feature in something I created. It looks and feels unprofessional. And I definitely could see some players accidentally muting their protagonist and complaining online about bugs.

I dislike this paternalistic tendency to protect us from ourselves.

 

They could do it like the old Total War games did - hide unsupported options in an .ini file so most players won't ever know they're there.

[AlanC9]

Problem created. There was no problem before.

They thought there was one. So did I. It was a fairly trivial problem, mind, since it's quite rare for the intended PC line and the interpreted PC line to diverge unless the player is fighting the design intent.

[pdusen]

I dislike this paternalistic tendency to protect us from ourselves.

 

They could do it like the old Total War games did - hide unsupported options in an .ini file so most players won't ever know they're there.

 

But then, if so few people are ever going to see it (I'd be surprised if even 1/1000 PC players tweak ini files), they need to weigh whether or not it's even worth taking away development time from other tasks to make those options available. Because they still need to make sure the options even work without breaking a thousand other things.

[Sylvius the Mad]

They thought there was one. So did I. It was a fairly trivial problem, mind, since it's quite rare for the intended PC line and the interpreted PC line to diverge unless the player is fighting the design intent.

And since I'm often fighting the intended design, I'd like some means to iignore that disagreement.

[Sylvius the Mad]

But then, if so few people are ever going to see it (I'd be surprised if even 1/1000 PC players tweak ini files), they need to weigh whether or not it's even worth taking away development time from other tasks to make those options available. Because they still need to make sure the options even work without breaking a thousand other things.

It's easy to break the Total War games by editing the .ini. The point of hiding the options there is so that it's not the designer's fault when a user breaks the game. And that eliminates the need to check all the possible modifications against the core game (or each other).

Powerful tools tend not to be user friendly. I would like powerful tools more than I would like user-friendliness.

[UniformGreyColor]

Those quotes have a link in them.  Top right corner.

 

 I know I personally don't have a problem with what was said. They make a very reasonable argument. Games are moving forward not staying the same. Perhaps you need a new medium to exercise your creativity?