Unfortunately that's not gonna happen. It would be cool if there was a toggle, but that's too much resources and time for something that's going to be rarely used.
Plus a toggle wouldn't really work. There would still be a scene that shows your character/Inquisitor/whatever talking or doing actions, it would just be on mute. It wouldn't really alleviate much of the underlying problem with making the player character more cinematic in nature.
Bioware was the leader in silent protagonist RPGs as well. A vast majority of their top selling games of all time were silent protagonists.
YOU took away MY peach pie, princess.
Now this is getting into the QQ realm of things.
Suck it up princess no one took your apple pie you can still get it with bethesda. What happen is one company that made apple pies changed to selling peach pies. This gives people choice in the market place a good thing. stop trying to take away our peach pie just because you don't like it. There is no inherient superiority to non PC voiced games. If you weren't blinded by your selfish desire to take away other peoples expeiences simply because you don't like it you could see that truth.
Voice acting protaganists is new to gaming. Bioware is the Leader of this type of cinamatic experience and they have been progressing to this type of cinamatic experience through out their history. it doesn't matter what they did in the past what matters is what direction bioware wants to take their art and the obvious tragetory they have been taken the RPG experience.
If you look at the progression of their RPGs it is moving in a very deliberate direction.
Buldar's gate - showed story telling RPgs still have a market
kotor - Started with changing camera angles and voiced dialogue (NPC) very different from BG.
ME - Takes it to the next step and adds voice to the PC.
DA - is just a refinement to this type of story telling. While DA:O came after ME1 the development of DA:O was too far along for them to add Protaganist voice acting and to be fair ME was an experiment they had no idea how the community would react and for the majority of people its been a possitive addition. Once they saw the results there was no question they wanted to this deliver this type of gaming experience. Don't want it? Okay don't buy it. You can get the type of RPG experience you do like from a different company.
The developers are artists they have a vision of what they want their art to be and the media for that art THEY want their art to include. So suck it up and stop QQing.
Now this is getting into the QQ realm of things.
Suck it up princess no one took your apple pie you can still get it with bethesda. What happen is one company that made apple pies changed to selling peach pies. This gives people choice in the market place a good thing. stop trying to take away our peach pie just because you don't like it. There is no inherient superiority to non PC voiced games. If you weren't blinded by your selfish desire to take away other peoples expeiences simply because you don't like it you could see that truth.
Voice acting protaganists is new to gaming. Bioware is the Leader of this type of cinamatic experience and they have been progressing to this type of cinamatic experience through out their history. it doesn't matter what they did in the past what matters is what direction bioware wants to take their art and the obvious tragetory they have been taken the RPG experience.
If you look at the progression of their RPGs it is moving in a very deliberate direction.
Buldar's gate - showed story telling RPgs still have a market
kotor - Started with changing camera angles and voiced dialogue (NPC) very different from BG.
ME - Takes it to the next step and adds voice to the PC.
DA - is just a refinement to this type of story telling. While DA:O came after ME1 the development of DA:O was too far along for them to add Protaganist voice acting and to be fair ME was an experiment they had no idea how the community would react and for the majority of people its been a possitive addition. Once they saw the results there was no question they wanted to this deliver this type of gaming experience. Don't want it? Okay don't buy it. You can get the type of RPG experience you do like from a different company.
The developers are artists they have a vision of what they want their art to be and the media for that art THEY want their art to include. So suck it up and stop QQing.
You can't tell someone to stop asking to take away your desired gameplay, then turn around and tell them to suck it up when the shoe is on the other foot. That's not how intelligent discourse works.
My comment was only to show how silly you were being - as if my comments now could affect a decision of Bioware actually removing the voiced dialogue, anymore than your comments (in your vast 18 post history) could have changed Bioware's mind to move to the voiced protag in the first place.
Bethesda offers a non-voiced protagonist, true. Then again, so does Minesweeper. Neither have anything resembling options, dialogue or a setting that the player can interact with. And, while I play TES and Fallout games and enjoy them, they aren't exactly games that facilitate (or even really allow) any roleplaying (minus New Vegas, but that's not Bethesda). I could just as easily say "there's Black Ops across the street, those characters are voiced, leave us Bioware fans and our tastes alone." Its dismissive.
Bioware did change its vision to attract more fans. To date, it has not been successful for the DA franchise, if you want to base success off of game sales and overall review scores (although that will certainly change here when DA:I is released, I have no doubt about that). That is Bioware's prerogative. It doesn't mean people can't talk about what they liked about the old design, why the new design isn't conducive to how they play and engage in a discussion about it. "Go away, Bioware is doing what I want, your way of playing a game is dumb" is not discussion.
For the record, I really like the voiced protagonist. I think it makes them much more memorable as a character, and they seem to "belong" in the world more when they are actually interacting with it's inhabitants. I agree it can be more limiting when it comes to roleplaying, but I think a lot of that is exaggeration and rose-colored lenses. I broke out DAO the other day, and I definitely notice the same themes of responses to dialogue: be a dick, say something witty, be polite and friendly, or be polite and distant. And even if it does limit versatility a little, I'm okay with that if it makes the characters more workable for Bioware. To give an example, Hawke is back in black for Inquisition, and the Warden is nowhere to be found.
I'll put it this way: when I think of epic moments in Dragon Age II, I think of the speech my Sarcastic Hawke gave to his companions before going out to fight the Templars. It was short, funny, inspiring, and the highlight of a mostly lackluster finale. But whenever I think of that speech, I am also reminded of Anora's voice cracking as she gave a painfully generic speech to my army, while my Warden looked on with a gormless expression on his face. It's always awkward every time I have to sit through it, and I always pause for a second and think "this would be so much better if my Warden was giving it".
Bethesda offers a non-voiced protagonist, true. Then again, so does Minesweeper. Neither have anything resembling options, dialogue or a setting that the player can interact with. And, while I play TES and Fallout games and enjoy them, they aren't exactly games that facilitate (or even really allow) any roleplaying (minus New Vegas, but that's not Bethesda). I could just as easily say "there's Black Ops across the street, those characters are voiced, leave us Bioware fans and our tastes alone." Its dismissive.
To be fair, Bioware's dialogue offerings are not exactly exceptional either. Good silent PC writing came from Troika, and now in part comes from Obsidian. Bioware, though, writes relatively bland, non-descriptive neutral dialogue.
Were you here? Because I did that a lot. I argued long and hard against a voiced protagonist before we got one, and even BioWare advanced those same arguments to promote DAO (which was released aftet ME, you might recall).Ambiguity in RPG has always been a factor and it has allays been a bone of contention with computer RPGs, now you want to take what has always been something players have wanted as a whole to eliminate and make it into a virtue and advantage of the system? Sorry i don't buy that argument. I can't think of a single instance befoer voice acting when people complained about ambiguity that players jumped in and said no ambiguity is great because i can RP better. I saw plenty of arguemnts that ambiguity ruined RP but no where were people crying out for even more ambiguity in the text dialogue because that enhanced the Rp experience.
That's a strength, not a weakness. BioWare's dialogue options were usually easily viewed as abstractions (like early TES keyword systems, or 1980s text parsers). That the remarks werr largely factual and emotionless was a good thing.To be fair, Bioware's dialogue offerings are not exactly exceptional either. Good silent PC writing came from Troika, and now in part comes from Obsidian. Bioware, though, writes relatively bland, non-descriptive neutral dialogue.
That's a strength, not a weakness. BioWare's dialogue options were usually easily viewed as abstractions (like early TES keyword systems, or 1980s text parsers). That the remarks werr largely factual and emotionless was a good thing.
That's most certainly a weakness. They can't be viewed as abstractions when there is a clear and necessary link between the actual content of that line and the response. Whatever debate we can have about the possible interpretations of the line and the breadth of those interpretations, the set of interpretations flows from the specific wording. This is is exactly the problem you have with the paraphrase - it is an abstraction of the line, and it's terrible for that reason.
Stop trying to take away my peach pie just because you don't like peaches. If you don't like peaches don't order this type of pie, its not like this is the only pie you can have. Just next door you can get an apple pie.
I agree it can be more limiting when it comes to roleplaying, but I think a lot of that is exaggeration and rose-colored lenses. I broke out DAO the other day, and I definitely notice the same themes of responses to dialogue: be a dick, say something witty, be polite and friendly, or be polite and distant.
And even if it does limit versatility a little, I'm okay with that if it makes the characters more workable for Bioware. To give an example, Hawke is back in black for Inquisition, and the Warden is nowhere to be found.
I'll put it this way: when I think of epic moments in Dragon Age II, I think of the speech my Sarcastic Hawke gave to his companions before going out to fight the Templars. It was short, funny, inspiring, and the highlight of a mostly lackluster finale. But whenever I think of that speech, I am also reminded of Anora's voice cracking as she gave a painfully generic speech to my army, while my Warden looked on with a gormless expression on his face. It's always awkward every time I have to sit through it, and I always pause for a second and think "this would be so much better if my Warden was giving it".
That's most certainly a weakness. They can't be viewed as abstractions when there is a clear and necessary link between the actual content of that line and the response. Whatever debate we can have about the possible interpretations of the line and the breadth of those interpretations, the set of interpretations flows from the specific wording. This is is exactly the problem you have with the paraphrase - it is an abstraction of the line, and it's terrible for that reason.
Only because the line is shown to us.
Am abstraction whose ambiguity we get to resolve ourselves is different-in-kind from one whose ambiguity is resolved for us, but too late for us to do anything about it.
Am abstraction whose ambiguity we get to resolve ourselves is different-in-kind from one whose ambiguity is resolved for us, but too late for us to do anything about it.
But the ambiguity is resolved for us. Even if I agree with you that there are multiple possible interpretations as between the PC and NPC where only one side is voiced, there are still only a defined and finite possible number of interpretations that rationally follow, even if you accept that a range of possible misinterpretations will exist.
Were you here? Because I did that a lot. I argued long and hard against a voiced protagonist before we got one, and even BioWare advanced those same arguments to promote DAO (which was released aftet ME, you might recall).
Silent is better because it leaves more space for headcanon. The voice leaves less.
But the ambiguity is resolved for us. Even if I agree with you that there are multiple possible interpretations as between the PC and NPC where only one side is voiced, there are still only a defined and finite possible number of interpretations that rationally follow, even if you accept that a range of possible misinterpretations will exist.
But the ambiguity is resolved for us. Even if I agree with you that there are multiple possible interpretations as between the PC and NPC where only one side is voiced, there are still only a defined and finite possible number of interpretations that rationally follow, even if you accept that a range of possible misinterpretations will exist.
The idea that voicing the protagonist is one of the reasons the JRPG scene was in decline is, and has always been, ridiculous. Many of the current high-selling games -RPG or otherwise- have voiced protagonists. If voiced protagonists are so detrimental to enjoying a game, those wouldn't be so enjoyed as they are.
Now the quality of the writing and voice acting, that can have a detrimental impact. And several JRPG's have been rather... lacking in that aspect recently. The latest Final Fantasy and Tales games were rather sub-par in writing and English voice acting.
I was replying to a comment about the earlier games, which offered only one voice per gender.
Moreover, even with 4 voices, we're limited to 4 broadly defined personalities. With the silent protagonist, we were barely limited at all.
I don't agree that a silent protagonist isn't limited. In a game like Wasteland 2, where there is very little voice acting then that might be accurate but in a game like DA:O, where everyone else but the Warden is voiced, we are limited by the reactions of the NPCs were are speaking too.
We could be imagining ourselves being the biggest hardass in the universe but if our companions aren't reacting to that what's the point.
There are many times in DA:O were it didn't matter what the Warden said or how we were rpging them to say it, the characters basically said the same thing, in the same tone.
Writing can't create a response based on something we're imagining in our head.
In Wasteland 2, I can give a voice and tone to not only the Rangers, but also is everyone they speak too, so I'm getting the proper reactivity.
Liking or not liking a Silent Protagonist is not as cut and dry as some people are making it out to be, as a number of people on this thread have said, it depends on whether or not the rest of the characters are voiced.
Perhaps this means that really there are two separate conversations to be had here, one on the merits of a silent protagonist in an all voiced game and another on the merits of a silent protagonist in a game with little to no voice acting, because they are two separate issues.
The idea that voicing the protagonist is one of the reasons the JRPG scene was in decline is, and has always been, ridiculous. Many of the current high-selling games -RPG or otherwise- have voiced protagonists. If voiced protagonists are so detrimental to enjoying a game, those wouldn't be so enjoyed as they are.
Now the quality of the writing and voice acting, that can have a detrimental impact. And several JRPG's have been rather... lacking in that aspect recently. The latest Final Fantasy and Tales games were rather sub-par in writing and English voice acting.
Regardless, the fact that Bioware founders were saying that right after DA:O came out, but then three months later were talking about how DA:O didn't engage players because of a lack of voiced main character when promoting DA2 seemed schizophrenic in nature.
Dunno, could also have been they got a lot of feedback from people who went "It's a good game and all... but I kinda miss my character having a voice."
I know that's what happened with me.
I don't agree that a silent protagonist isn't limited. In a game like Wasteland 2, where there is very little voice acting then that might be accurate but in a game like DA:O, where everyone else but the Warden is voiced, we are limited by the reactions of the NPCs were are speaking too.
We could be imagining ourselves being the biggest hardass in the universe but if our companions aren't reacting to that what's the point.
There are many times in DA:O were it didn't matter what the Warden said or how we were rpging them to say it, the characters basically said the same thing, in the same tone.
Writing can't create a response based on something we're imagining in our head.
In Wasteland 2, I can give a voice and tone to not only the Rangers, but also is everyone they speak too, so I'm getting the proper reactivity.
Liking or not liking a Silent Protagonist is not as cut and dry as some people are making it out to be, as a number of people on this thread have said, it depends on whether or not the rest of the characters are voiced.
Perhaps this means that really there are two separate conversations to be had here, one on the merits of a silent protagonist in an all voiced game and another on the merits of a silent protagonist in a game with little to no voice acting, because they are two separate issues.
Dunno, could also have been they got a lot of feedback from people who went "It's a good game and all... but I kinda miss my character having a voice."
I know that's what happened with me.
I don't agree with this summation. You say it does not work when other NPCs are voiced because they cannot reinforce a player's intended tone, but I say that is exactly the point - a well written line and delivery would be able to work for a number of different intentions.
As much as I enjoy Wasteland 2, it really isn't a strong vehicle for Roleplaying any more than Skyrim is. It does have some great instances of choice and consequence and morally grey decisions, but the ability to express our character through dialogue is very limited to buzz word selections. But that's a different conversation.
I don't agree, or atleast I've never seen an example of it done.
The more playthroughs I did of DA:O, the more I realised that what the Warden said or how I wanted them to say things didn't matter in a conversation.
I might have 5 options in a conversation but the person I'm speaking reactions in the same way to most of them because their voiced.
I like reactivity from my companions and I don't believe that a silent protagonist in a voiced game can give the same reactivity as a voice protagonist.
Oh, I'm sure that's EXACTLY what happened. Still, to change your vision of game design dramatically in such a short period of time to appeal to a wider audience and act like anyone who liked the series as it was originally envisioned and designed as people stuck in the past just makes me cynical.
I see it as admitting to ones mistake. Blinded by nostalgia, they thought that the reason JRPG's failed was that they did voiced player characters while the RPG's from their memories did not. Turns out that wasn't the case, and many players do want voiced player characters.
Admitting you're wrong is the first step to improving. Granted, DAII was one step forward, two steps backwards when you look at the full picture, but it's still one step forward.
And given that I just cant imagine DAII without snarky Hawke anymore, it was a damn good step.
For purely aesthetic reasons, I prefer a voiced Protagonist. I loved my Wardens, but the wooden faced reactions--in particular the scene in the CE female origin where one of the bridesmaid's is brutally cut down and every other woman in the room reacts while my warden just stands there blank eyed like a mannequin--was particularly disturbing. Having you do all the RP 'in your head' because they can't anticipate every reaction you want your warden to have inhibits RP in some alarming ways.
A lot of people complained that the warden seemed sad/upset at Cailan's funeral because they argued "my warden wouldn't have done that". I would have preferred multiple approaches to the situation (such as what DA2 provided) to responding to NPC's in the game. Watching my protagonist react to the world around her, and watching the world react to her. While that would seem to limit it to 2-4 lines, what we got in Origins wasn't much better. I think most dialogues were around 3-5 lines anyway.
From the videos I've seen of Keep, things that will evoke an emotional response will now have emotional responses from your inquisitor, a definite step in the right direction, and one I'm looking forward to exploring.
Mark me as a vote for keeping a voiced protagonist as long as the treatment of such voice acting continues to evolve as it seems to be doing.
I see it as admitting to ones mistake. Blinded by nostalgia, they thought that the reason JRPG's failed was that they did voiced player characters while the RPG's from their memories did not. Turns out that wasn't the case, and many players do want voiced player characters.
Admitting you're wrong is the first step to improving. Grated, DAII was one step forward, two steps backwards when you look at the full picture, but it's still one step forward.
And given that I just cant imagine DAII without snarky Hawke anymore, it was a damn good step.
Yes, they were so wrong that the DA sequel that included a voiced character sold half as much as the original game without one. Or the space RPG with a voiced character which didn't sell as much as DA:O until it's third game. Meanwhile the highest selling RPG of all time comes out afterwards to the tune of 20 million copies with a silent main character.
They really paid attention to the right lessons to get more players, that's for sure.
Yes and the voiced protagonist is the sole reason for all of these things.
DA2 certainly had many other things that people didn't like, although I enjoyed it overall.
The general criticisms of ME don't include the voice acting.
I loved Skyrim, but felt that the voiced acting was lackluster across the whole game, with the exception of the Dawnguard DLC.
You've made a false equivalency between games that sell well & games that have a silent protagonist.
I could do the same thing, but the other way around.
Grand Theft Auto 3 sold 14.5 million copies but Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas sold 21.5 million.
but then I could confuse things and say that Fallout 3 and the Witcher 2 sold almost the same amount.
No game falls or raises based on one feature of that game, a poorly received game always has multiple issues, unless its a Kinect game.
Retour en haut