572 réponses à ce sujet

[Lieutenant Kurin]

Right. And it's never knowable outside your own head.

No one else can read your thoughts.
That's not nearly often enough to be a useful tool, and given the frequency with which I am accused of having an intent I don't based on how I said something, it also seems high.
How do you get from that to concluding that the joke was expressed? That he perceived it doesn't mean it was there. Only that he perceived it.
Again, you're drawing unsupported conclusions.

I agree that's how the lines are recorded. And I agree that's how the lines are written. But why do you then conclude that the PC delivers the line in accordance with how it was written? There's a leap there I don't follow.

Why Steve Valentine read the line that way has nothing to do with why Alistair responded as he did.

 

Intent is expressed in how a person walks, talks and emotes. Intent doesn't exist inside one's head only, it is expressed whether knowingly or unknowingly. The fact that the PC's intent doesn't match with your own belief of what intent you had should tell you something. You don't get a million and one intentions for each line no matter if the protagonist is voiced or not.

 

Your Warden doesn't exist inside a vacuum. They had a voice, in the world of Thedas, they *spoke*, you just didn't see it, otherwise, no one would ever respond to them. Alistair also doesn't exist in a vacuum. He perceived he was being called a royal bastard as a joke because your character said it as a joke. If your character had said it differently, Alistair would have responded differently. Acting is reacting is sad, but true no matter if one is being themself in a conversation or acting as someone else. What Steve was reacting to, in character, has everything to do with why Alistair responded the way he did.

 

These characters are supposed to be real people. They react to their circumstances and how other people act to them. And, because of every other character's VA, their reactions are limited, and what you could have said as the Warden, is limited. It is almost impossible for that royal bastard line to not be a joke, and it is impossible for that line to have been intended with malice. It would have manifested in the way the PC spoke the line in the world of Thedas, and it, said as a joke, caused Alistair to recognize it as such and respond in kind.

 

EDIT: Also, I think I just realized that this thread is slightly to caustic for me...

Modifié par Lieutenant Kurin, 10 octobre 2014 - 08:43 .

[DaySeeker]

Does voice makes a protagonist more human? That depends on who you've asked the question to; for me the answer is no. A voiced protagonist makes it harder for one to role play the character. A voiced protagonist makes a game feel like an interactive movie instead of a game.

 

Completely disagree. In a world where everyone else speaks out loud and your character has specific expressed dialogue without vocalization having a voice does make them more human.  If you choose to read the line however you want inside your head it does not change the character's intent or expression because the rest of the folks in the story are reacting to the line the way the actor gave it and, presumably, how the writer's wrote it.  

 

The game is an "interactive movie" whether your character speaks or not.  I also find "interactive movie" a a denigrating term useless, what you mean is "video game with a fleshed out story," which are the type of games I like.  If you want a game where you can make up the story then play pen and paper or games that are about twiching where the stories are less defined and the characters just design.    

[happy_daiz]

Conversations seem a lot more organic to me when everyone is speaking.

That said, both voiced and non-voiced paraphrasing should include a hint at the inflection behind the words. I have had moments in both where the paraphrasing made a line seem sweet or charming, but could have mixed results. The way I read it versus how it was intended could be vastly different.

If they can get the paraphrasing right, I'm good either way.

If I could add a wink, or some way to emote my pc's intent with delivery, I would be a happy girl indeed.

[Snook]

I like unvoiced protagonists, because I feel like I can mold that character's personality much more. But I don't think there's anything really wrong with voiced - and now that we have more voices to choose from, I'll probably like it much more than I have in the past. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Intent is expressed in how a person walks, talks and emotes. Intent doesn't exist inside one's head only, it is expressed whether knowingly or unknowingly.

Not in any meaningful way. It's not possible to accurately discern your intent from any perspective that is outside your head.

The fact that the PC's intent doesn't match with your own belief of what intent you had should tell you something.

It would, if it ever happened. But there is literally never any direct evidence of that.

And the indirect evidence isn't reliable.

Your Warden doesn't exist inside a vacuum. They had a voice, in the world of Thedas, they *spoke*, you just didn't see it, otherwise, no one would ever respond to them. Alistair also doesn't exist in a vacuum. He perceived he was being called a royal bastard as a joke because your character said it as a joke. If your character had said it differently, Alistair would have responded differently.

Emphasis mine.

The bold part I don't get. That's the assumption on which your entire position rests, and I don't share it.

Acting is reacting is sad, but true no matter if one is being themself in a conversation or acting as someone else. What Steve was reacting to, in character, has everything to do with why Alistair responded the way he did.

No. It has to do with how the line sounds. That's it.

These characters are supposed to be real people. They react to their circumstances and how other people act to them.

And like real people, they do it in complex and unpredictable ways.

And, because of every other character's VA, their reactions are limited, and what you could have said as the Warden, is limited. It is almost impossible for that royal bastard line to not be a joke, and it is impossible for that line to have been intended with malice. It would have manifested in the way the PC spoke the line in the world of Thedas, and it, said as a joke, caused Alistair to recognize it as such and respond in kind.

I meant it as a neutral question, and it worked fine.

[Roses]

so you rather have a Hawke 2.o where when you pick a line he/she says something completly diffrent from what that one lines says?

Personally I never had a problem with what my Hawke said. But for the future this will be improved. As I saw in the demos of DAI, for example, the dialogue wheel now shows an explanation of what's going to be said and how it will affect the scenario further when you hover over options. I actually find it amazing that they listened to even such small complaints, and hopefully now the dialogue wheel and voice will be a good experience for everyone

[AlexiaRevan]

I like my charachter to be voiced . Although not all the voices are good . Some will grow on ya over time , some will stay annoying forever . In old games , like Baldur's Gate the hero wasn't voiced . Then again , I can recall his companions like Minsc and Jaheira quotes then his . So I guess voicing do help our memory in the long run . Sorry but I rather have a voice actor....it give life to my charachter . 

[coldflame]

Completely disagree. In a world where everyone else speaks out loud and your character has specific expressed dialogue without vocalization having a voice does make them more human.  If you choose to read the line however you want inside your head it does not change the character's intent or expression because the rest of the folks in the story are reacting to the line the way the actor gave it and, presumably, how the writer's wrote it.  

 

The game is an "interactive movie" whether your character speaks or not.  I also find "interactive movie" a a denigrating term useless, what you mean is "video game with a fleshed out story," which are the type of games I like.  If you want a game where you can make up the story then play pen and paper or games that are about twiching where the stories are less defined and the characters just design.    

 

I will reiterate my point. Does giving the protagonist a voice makes it more human? In my opinion no. This is beacuase as you've siad, NPCs in the game are not going to distinguish whether the protagonist's actually got a voice or not. Those AIs are just going to spit out pre-determined responses anyways, becase the intention from a voiced or not protagonist will always be pre-determined by the writter, therefore, the protagonist is actually just running on some scripts and by adding a voice to that is not goning to make it any less mechanical than a non-voiced protagonist. So, no, a voiced protagonist does not make it more human.

 

As for the term interactive movie; have you noticed that Bioware has always marketed the ME games as 'Shepard's sory' instead of your story? When there is a voiced protagonist, as a player you (ok just me then) take a step back and simply picking through the options available to you and see what the outcomes are; a lot like a movie but you could choose to see a different story arc at your discretion. However, when you have a slient protagonist, not only would you put your own voice to it, you imagined how you would deliver those lines; you became that person. When you have became the protagonist in the game, the game world became your world and every decision you made became important to you. The ability to be able to put your own voice in to a character is a powerful thing. A voiced protagonist leaves no room for imagination. No room for imagination in a RPG is an oxymoron

[AlexiaRevan]

It's a matter of opinion . While you take a step back from say Shepard because he or she is voiced . I'm the opposite . I do like the voice , and it help me build up her personality trough choices and interaction . And the Voice is for US not the NPC or the AI . 

 

I don't need and didn't need for shepard to be silent for me to make a tons of shepard with different background story and different attitude toward all 3 games . 

[ManOfSteel]

I'd much rather have a voiced protagonist. A voice helps to convey that the protagonist is a character in the world, and not simply an empty avatar for the player. At the end of the day, it's down to personal preference and what a particular person wants from the game. But the protagonist has never been someone I personally inhabit as others do. They're a character in the world that I control as the story progresses, and I'd much rather it remain that way.

[Arcling]

Thanks to being voiced, Hawke, just like Shepard, had much more character than the Warden, who was practically a blank slate and this also made him/her easier to bring into DA:I as a charater that Inquisitor will meet. Ofc, I understand how some people prefer to play a "silent" character, as they see this as "true" roleplaying. To each their own, I guess. But in my opinion, in the end there are only limited variables as to what character can say/choose, so having these voiced is way better, rather than feeling kinda awkward when other characters respond to the "silence".

[Kinom001]

My two cents; give the characters voice actors rather than simply text.

[Joseph Warrick]

Use the same system for the player and NPCs imo. If NPCs talk, the protagonist has to talk. Do either NWN or Mass Effect. Both work. The Kotor / Fallout / TES way feels jarring to me, with the protagonist staring quietly while everyone else is talking.

[Knight of Dane]

No, keep doing it. It's much more engaging.

[JWvonGoethe]

I don't go into every game expecting the same thing - I can enjoy voiced or unvoiced protagonists, dialogue choices or no dialogue choices. It all depends on how well the game executes these features.

 

However, there is absolutely no question in my mind that a voiced PC drastically limits the roleplaying opportunities compared to having an unvoiced PC. I do not understand how anyone could argue that the characters of Hawke or Shepard present a greater scope for roleplaying than the character of the Warden does. You can't choose Hawke's phrasing, tone or body language. It is all displayed right in front of you. You can choose how the Warden expresses each line. And figuring out why a character like Alistair might react differently than expected to a dialogue choice just adds to the enjoyment I get out of playing an unvoiced PC.

 

This is coming from someone who loves the dialogue wheel when it's matched with good VA and writing.

[Aimi]

You can't choose Hawke's phrasing, tone or body language. It is all displayed right in front of you. You can choose how the Warden expresses each line. And figuring out why a character like Alistair might react differently than expected to a dialogue choice just adds to the enjoyment I get out of playing an unvoiced PC.

That's a level of solipsism to which, I believe, few people actually subscribe (although, obviously, some other prominent forumites do), and it's one that I don't find particularly persuasive in this context. If you can ignore or mentally rewrite NPCs' voiced/acted reactions to a PC comment, there's no intrinsic reason for you to be unable to ignore or mentally rewrite voiced PC comments themselves.

Either way, voiced or unvoiced, you are playing as a character written and implemented by someone else, and you lack the ability to demonstratively roleplay that character in ways that the writers and programmers did not intend. Tone, emphasis, and intent are all baked into the protagonist's lines anyway out of necessity. I don't think that a voiced protagonist improves roleplaying opportunities compared to an unvoiced one; I simply think that it does not reduce roleplay in a meaningful way.

I personally have a strong preference for voiced protagonists in voiced games because playing as a mute tabula rasa is immersion-shattering for me when everybody else is talking. But when the voice acting is poor, I am less likely to play than if the protagonist is unvoiced (or I simply mute the game to avoid dealing with the problem).

[Sylvius the Mad]

That's a level of solipsism to which, I believe, few people actually subscribe (although, obviously, some other prominent forumites do), and it's one that I don't find particularly persuasive in this context. If you can ignore or mentally rewrite NPCs' voiced/acted reactions to a PC comment, there's no intrinsic reason for you to be unable to ignore or mentally rewrite voiced PC comments themselves.

Who's rewriting NPC reactions?  I'm certainly not.  I'm just not willing to draw unsubstantiated conclusions about the causes of those reactions.

Either way, voiced or unvoiced, you are playing as a character written and implemented by someone else, and you lack the ability to demonstratively roleplay that character in ways that the writers and programmers did not intend.

Granted.  I don't see that as relevant, however, given that I could happily roleplay in the keyword based dialogue systems from 30 years ago.  If NAME, JOB, and HEAL are enough for me to roleplay, then I don't need to see the faces or hear the voices.

Tone, emphasis, and intent are all baked into the protagonist's lines anyway out of necessity.

No they are not.  If they were, you could point to them.  You could show them to people.

 

But you can't do that.  Therefore, they're not demonstrably there.

I don't think that a voiced protagonist improves roleplaying opportunities compared to an unvoiced one; I simply think that it does not reduce roleplay in a meaningful way.

And it might not.  I know the paraphrase does - so far, the paraphrase has been an abomination - but I haven't had the chance to examine the voice in the absence of the paraphrase.

I personally have a strong preference for voiced protagonists in voiced games because playing as a mute tabula rasa is immersion-shattering for me when everybody else is talking.

I don't listen to myself speak in the real world, so having to do it in the game (to find out what I've said) is entirely unlike how I think speech should work.

 

I should know what I'm going to say before I say it, not after.  I should know why I'm saying it in advance, not try to figure it out in retrospect.  That's my problem with the voice+paraphrase so far: I can't tell what my character is going to say or why until it's too late.  As such, I'm not the one decide what she'll say.  I can't have her avoid saying things I don't want her to say.  I can't tell whether she's going to be nice the people.  I can't tell whether she's going to be angry.

 

And those should always be my choice.  Those choices should never be made for me.  I know I'll have to choose from a finite list, but I should get to choose.

 

And DA2 didn't let me choose.  ME2 didn't let me choose.

 

Really, choosing from a finite list is largely how real world conversations work for me, as well.  I come up with something to say, and then I come up with something else to say, and then maybe something else, and when I find one I like I go with it.  Or I might retreat to one I'd previously passed.  I never just say teh first thing that pops into my mind - that would be crazy.  So I find choosing from a finite list very natural.

 

But I should get to choose.  Guessing isn't choosing.

[Shadow Quickpaw]

If we remove the voice, there would be no more punching reporters, or taking a potshot at someone in the middle of their monologue, or interupting someone's bs. Granted Bioware's only done that in the last two ME games, but they wouldn't be possible without protagonist VO. At least, not in the way Bioware did them.

 

One thing I've started doing whenever I play "voiceless" Bioware games (they're in fact not completely voiceless, Revan and the Spirit monk had battlecries and DAO let you choose a voice for non-conversation vocals) is saying the protagonist's words out loud before selecting them. I actually fooled my sister into thinking I had some kind of voice control going on.

 

It's really a preference thing, but with games becoming more and more cinematic we'll probably see less of the silent protag as time goes on.

 

In my personal opinion the relationships between "your" character and his companions seem far more real and nuanced when fully voiced, especially the romances. But that's just me.

[KainD]

Most people nowadays like watching movies more than roleplaying. We will just have to deal with it OP.

[Sylvius the Mad]

If we remove the voice, there would be no more punching reporters, or taking a potshot at someone in the middle of their monologue, or interupting someone's bs. Granted Bioware's only done that in the last two ME games, but they wouldn't be possible without protagonist VO. At least, not in the way Bioware did them.

BioWare doesn't have to do it that way.  In Exile and I worked out a mechanism that would world in place of ME2's interrupts even without a voiced protagonist.

 

He likes the voice, but I don't, and we designed an interrupt system that we both liked,

It's really a preference thing, but with games becoming more and more cinematic we'll probably see less of the silent protag as time goes on.

Wasteland 2 is terrific.

[In Exile]

I will reiterate my point. Does giving the protagonist a voice makes it more human? In my opinion no. This is beacuase as you've siad, NPCs in the game are not going to distinguish whether the protagonist's actually got a voice or not. Those AIs are just going to spit out pre-determined responses anyways, becase the intention from a voiced or not protagonist will always be pre-determined by the writter, therefore, the protagonist is actually just running on some scripts and by adding a voice to that is not goning to make it any less mechanical than a non-voiced protagonist. So, no, a voiced protagonist does not make it more human.

As for the term interactive movie; have you noticed that Bioware has always marketed the ME games as 'Shepard's sory' instead of your story? When there is a voiced protagonist, as a player you (ok just me then) take a step back and simply picking through the options available to you and see what the outcomes are; a lot like a movie but you could choose to see a different story arc at your discretion. However, when you have a slient protagonist, not only would you put your own voice to it, you imagined how you would deliver those lines; you became that person. When you have became the protagonist in the game, the game world became your world and every decision you made became important to you. The ability to be able to put your own voice in to a character is a powerful thing. A voiced protagonist leaves no room for imagination. No room for imagination in a RPG is an oxymoron

You're totally wrong about ME1s marketing. It was entirely about giving you your own character. Even the paraphrase was justified on the basis of putting you in the characters shoes - in this case being about that situation where what you think isn't exactly what you say.

[In Exile]

BioWare doesn't have to do it that way. In Exile and I worked out a mechanism that would world in place of ME2's interrupts even without a voiced protagonist.

He likes the voice, but I don't, and we designed an interrupt system that we both liked,
Wasteland 2 is terrific.

The voice is just a feature that should be appreciated or not on its own term . Depite what Bioware likes to pair it up with, there's no necessary dependency. Even they are starting to realized it (see e.g. their attempt to do a reaction wheel).

[Sylvius the Mad]

in this case being about that situation where what you think isn't exactly what you say.

So Shepard was being intentionally deceitful?