How much $$$ would you like to see spent on voice acting in the sequel?

[Silent Winter]

The problem:

 

Text description. "Voiced dialogue."

where the voice acting starts before you've had a chance to read the text description.

 

It should follow this format:

 

Text description.

 

(press Continue)

 

"Voiced dialogue."

where the text description is used only to convey what well-written dialogue alone cannot.

^Very much this

[mnoisewater]

I only care that my main PC and companions have voices. Everyone else can be mute, as far as I'm concerned.

[Qorach]

One thing I dont understand is how original baldurs Gate 1 was able to afford Hollywood actors as VO, and PoE could not. I doubt BG had higher budget.

[b0rsuk]

For a quick reference, out of the 41 people that have voted so far, 87,7% have voted for the same level of voiceovers as in PoE or less.

 

A mere 12,2% desires more, while almost 61% have specifically requested less.

 

We need a larger sample size, though.

 

There's also selection bias. The poll only includes people who care enough about the game to create a forum. More dedicated gamers.

[Luckmann]

 

For a quick reference, out of the 41 people that have voted so far, 87,7% have voted for the same level of voiceovers as in PoE or less.

 

A mere 12,2% desires more, while almost 61% have specifically requested less.

 

We need a larger sample size, though.

 

There's also selection bias. The poll only includes people who care enough about the game to create a forum. More dedicated gamers.

 

 

Well they didn't create a forum; it's the official forums, after all. That being said, we are of course talking about the dedicated fanbase. From that POV, I don't think there's any meaningful selection bias, because I don't think we're interested in what those that aren't fans are interested in.

 

A marketing department might be, but down that route lies Hell and mediocrity.

[fgalkin]

VO isn't the problem, unrealistic Kickstarter goals are. Obsidian always had problems with estimating time and cost, so they apparently seriously thought they could make a game with $1 million, then felt the need to add unnecessary bits like Stronghold and Endless Paths, and backer NPCs. When they actually started making the game, they realized that they're in trouble re: funds, but it was already too late, and they had committed to the stretch goals. This is why the middle of the game feels kinda raw and unfinished, but we have a gazillion backer NPCs standing about, and 15 levels of the Endless Paths, rather than 15 new areas in Defiance Bay.

 

Have a very nice day.

-fgalkin

[Luckmann]

VO isn't the problem, unrealistic Kickstarter goals are. Obsidian always had problems with estimating time and cost, so they apparently seriously thought they could make a game with $1 million, then felt the need to add unnecessary bits like Stronghold and Endless Paths, and backer NPCs. When they actually started making the game, they realized that they're in trouble re: funds, but it was already too late, and they had committed to the stretch goals. This is why the middle of the game feels kinda raw and unfinished, but we have a gazillion backer NPCs standing about, and 15 levels of the Endless Paths, rather than 15 new areas in Defiance Bay.

 

Have a very nice day.

-fgalkin

 

I do not agree that the Stronghold and the Endless Paths were necessarily unnecessary bits, but at the end, I generally agree with you, and I think it would've been preferable if they had simply said "We're going to cut the Stronghold, because we do not feel we can do it justice, and would rather expand upon other things". Same thing for the Endless Paths.

 

The vast majority of the Endless Paths already feel like stand-alone dungeons largely disconnected from eachother, with no real sense of internal ecology or interesting puzzles. Exactly what I'd like to see in wilderness areas, not in a megadungeon. 5-10 wilderness areas with 5-10 dungeons, or an extra map or two for Defiance Bay, or just more content and feels in Defiance Bay, instead? Yes please.

 

And I feel that the Stronghold detracts more than it adds, simply because it doesn't really feel relevant or soulful, it feels like something that's just there, like much of the backer content (the items, the NPC:s and the memorials; the Inns are actually really great, except The Wailing Banshee, which.. doesn't actually have anything, once you've actually established the Inn).

[Dadalama]

Most of the non dedicated fanbase probably wouldn't care that much anyways. It's another new game, they'll play it and may or may not moan a little about having to read but end up saying it's good anyways because it probably will be. The non dedicated fans, and even most dedicated fans would want it to be "more like <game x>" without really knowing what they liked about said game. So they would vote for things that make it more like said game. Even if superficially.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Dadalama

[Nonek]

Once i've heard a voice, and grown accustomed to its use by certain characters then my mind automatically begins to read things in that characters voice, so minimal voice acting is sufficient for me personally. For instance I was always sure that Fall From Grace's dialogue with the Transcendant One in the Fortress of Regrets was voiced, as I clearly remembered hearing Jennifer Hale's clear, lovely and measured tones challenging Nameless' nemesis. Upon replaying however I found out that it is all text, I was astounded.

 

That said there are some monologues that I would not wish to miss, such as Torian Kel's speech on the battle between the Molochean Hand and the Derian Ka in Arcanum, which was spine tinglingly good.

[Ink Blot]

I voted for some but a little less. Honestly, I'd be fine with none. I just finished a run through The Banner Saga, which has no voice acting other than the narrator (and that's sparse). Granted, it's a different style of game, but I find you can get a good (if not better) feel for the characters with no voice acting at all. So if it's a limited budget and that money could go to adding something else or making what's there a lot better, then spend it somewhere other than voice acting.

[Bryy]

Wow, really?

 

All the "More VO" options are paired with "even though it will take away from other parts of the game"?

 

Really?

 

 

One thing I dont understand is how original baldurs Gate 1 was able to afford Hollywood actors as VO, and PoE could not. I doubt BG had higher budget.

Baldur's Gate was made in '98. Union fees were way lower, and video games in particular were of no concern to SAG. Also, BG took about $10m, I believe. Obsidian wanted $20 million from Atari to make Baldur's Gate 3. People often forget that, yes, Obsidian got nearly $4m and raised $6m, but that's nothing for a tech project.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Bryy

[Bryy]

dp 

Edited May 2, 2015 by Bryy

[Sensuki]

Obsidian wanted $20 million from Atari to make Baldur's Gate 3. People often forget that, yes, Obsidian got nearly $4m and raised $6m, but that's nothing for a tech project.

A BG3 that was likely a AAA, fully voiced, 3D game for PC and Console.

[Matt516]

Wow, really?

 

All the "More VO" options are paired with "even though it will take away from other parts of the game"?

 

Really?

 

 

Note the assumption baked into the question. The poll is very clearly framed as "IF this is true, then what do you think?".

 

If that's not true (though I don't really see how it could possibly not be true - there's only X dollars to make the game and every dollar spent on Y feature is a dollar that can't be spent on any other feature), then it's a moot point. As I said, I'm not primarily interested in people's opinions on VO in a vacuum, but their opinions on VO GIVEN the financial realities of things.

 

So no, I don't see a problem with the poll. I've actually edited it a few times to remove hyperbolic or biased language, trying to keep only the factual language. If you know something about Obsidian's financials that the rest of us don't know, feel free to tell us though.

Edited May 2, 2015 by Matt516

[Yellow Rabbit]

Well, there are things with way better usefulness/cost balance than VO, that much is for sure. I'd say PoE could do with less of it.

[Bryy]

 

Obsidian wanted $20 million from Atari to make Baldur's Gate 3. People often forget that, yes, Obsidian got nearly $4m and raised $6m, but that's nothing for a tech project.

A BG3 that was likely a AAA, fully voiced, 3D game for PC and Console.

 

Yeah, but if that's what they thought they needed to make the game, I don't really see the issue here.

[cctobias]

 

 

Obsidian wanted $20 million from Atari to make Baldur's Gate 3. People often forget that, yes, Obsidian got nearly $4m and raised $6m, but that's nothing for a tech project.

A BG3 that was likely a AAA, fully voiced, 3D game for PC and Console.

 

Yeah, but if that's what they thought they needed to make the game, I don't really see the issue here.

 

The issue is that people who make thing professionally sometimes get, unavoidably, discconected from what people think by the echo chamber of the general games industry at large.

 

Its simply an assumed thing sometimes that because everyone is doing VA that its always the next thing to put resources towards.  But in reality as this poll shows, and I am pretty certain a very large sample size would only swing it 10% or so, a assumption that more VA would be good if we only had the money is probably less well founded than may be generally thought.  

 

Reviewers rave about VA, other games spend tons of money on it, its a naturally forming self-reinforced misconception.  Most people playing RPGs or Indie of various stipes simply don't care that much or only care in very specific instances.  Reviewers can rave all they like about it, but the audience in general only raves about very particular VA performances in very particular sequences and they are smart enough to know this(on some level often not entirely consciously formed). 

[jackjack]

Reading is fun, voice actors are expensive, and the budget is limited. Spend the money elsewhere, I say.

[Wintersong]

No VO.

Unless everybody speaks Simlish.
Choo wagga choo choo
Blursh! Meshaloob! Blursh!
Benzi chibna looble bazebni gweb

 

[Tigranes]

I would pay $100 for a Pingu dubs option.

 

[Awathorn]

I would prefer more portraits for NPCs, scripted interactions and BG style drawings of weapons and armors then more VO. 

 

Also, having more VO leads to more danger of dialogue turning out funny. Like dead hanged dwarf lady. 

 

Recently played NWN2. Well, tried to play it. It's a perfect example how 3D and tons of VO is vastly inferior to, let's say, PoE in its present state. 

[qualiyah]

I think I agree with most of the folks who have posted--the balance of where the voice-acting is placed in this game is not ideal.

 

I like to have the sound of a character's voice in my mind, especially if it's truly well-voiced. But I get bored listening to a whole *conversation* in which every line the character speaks is voiced. I think the way BG2 did this was that only the first sentence of a monologue, or the first sentence of each of the first 2-3 comments in a long conversation, would be voiced, and then everything else would just be text. That was enough that I felt like I had "heard" the conversation rather than merely reading it--but it also kept me from being bored. I think that's the perfect way to do it.

 

I'd also like to hear more miscellaneous greetings from townsfolk, and I'd like more of the random one-line banters from companions to be voiced. In general, more short individual lines should be voiced, in a way that is more spread out around the game world, but in exchange very, very few long passages should be voiced.

[Matt516]

Bump. Just to try to break 100 responses.

[barakav]

Attention whore...

Edited May 3, 2015 by barakav

[Bryy]

 

 

 

Obsidian wanted $20 million from Atari to make Baldur's Gate 3. People often forget that, yes, Obsidian got nearly $4m and raised $6m, but that's nothing for a tech project.

A BG3 that was likely a AAA, fully voiced, 3D game for PC and Console.

 

Yeah, but if that's what they thought they needed to make the game, I don't really see the issue here.

 

The issue is that people who make thing professionally sometimes get, unavoidably, discconected from what people think by the echo chamber of the general games industry at large.

 

Its simply an assumed thing sometimes that because everyone is doing VA that its always the next thing to put resources towards.  But in reality as this poll shows, and I am pretty certain a very large sample size would only swing it 10% or so, a assumption that more VA would be good if we only had the money is probably less well founded than may be generally thought.  

 

Reviewers rave about VA, other games spend tons of money on it, its a naturally forming self-reinforced misconception.  Most people playing RPGs or Indie of various stipes simply don't care that much or only care in very specific instances.  Reviewers can rave all they like about it, but the audience in general only raves about very particular VA performances in very particular sequences and they are smart enough to know this(on some level often not entirely consciously formed). 

 

We're talking about the guys that brought us Pillars. I'd be with you if it was Atari going "hey, here's $20 million", but it wasn't.