Deadfire will have FULL Voice over. It's ON!

[SonicMage117]

I am happy to see there will be full VO. I think it adds a lot to the game, especially for the companions and other main npcs.

Yes, it will. We asked, we received received aHehe

[Karkarov]

EDIT: In fact there's a great meme image about the downfall of RPGs that illustrates this very nostalgiac delusion. I can't find it at the moment but it goes like this. It's from the act two climax of Planescape: Torment, a game all agree is a roleplaying masterpiece. Ravel is asking the Big Thematic Question of the main character: What can change the nature of a man? There's something like 30 responses the player can give. The writers went out of their way to accommodate as many takeaways of the question the player could conceivably had as possible.

Ravel responds exactly the same way no matter which of these dozens of options the player picks. Whoever made the image didn't show that part.

Just as an aside, no "all" do not agree.  I think planescape: torment is the most over hyped insult to the campaign world it is named after that ever was.  It had crap gameplay, the"philosophy" was often sophomoric and pedantic, and quite frankly the game was 100% style over substance.  No thank you.

 

Your example is great though because it shows why Dragon Age is actually better.  See the thing is, your three options are limited to only three, and they are sort of corny, but the person you are talking to actually responds differently to each option.  Unlike planescape torment where you are faced with the illusion of choice.

 

As for this announcement, that's fine, if they could budget it all good with me.  As long as they avoided the Bethesda Water Cooler gimmick where 50-70% of the npcs in the game are just voiced by Bethesda staff and all sound the same.  "Choice" wise it won't be significant because the main character has no voice anyway.  There may be need to record multiple responses but it is still only half the conversation.

[SonicMage117]

I haven't seen a downfall of the rpg genre, I've just seen a "different" rise...

 

Planescape Torment and Baldurs Gate 2 are definitely over hyped and not in any way better than rpg's today, just different. One misconception among nostalgic rpg-enthusiasts (well Crpg era gamers to be more precise) is that there is less handholding, more difficulty, more strategy and more freedom in IE games than we have now - of course, this isn't true but there's always that gamer's definition of what freedom "should" be. What writing "should" be like or what topics it would touch on. The rpg's especially the 3 person made indie games which I have played easily match the quality of an old IE game but the length may be shorter.

 

Point being, writing hasn't degressed in game, there's only so much you can do when adding full VO, that's a given. Technology still hasn't caught up to where devs can do all and of course budget is another factor.

 

This was definitely a smart move for Obsidian, it will definitely heighten sales on consoles which I believe to be one of the main decisions behind this choice. Especially since console sales for Pillars 1 was deathly abysmal (very VERY shockingly poor).

 

As someone who loves to read, I read a bit too much om screen as it is, at home or at work, on paper too. So this is welcoming for me as my eyes will hurt less. "This is one of those things where everyone wins".

[The Sharmat]

Eder and Durance are both from the Dyrwood, and while Eder is clearly a good ole boy from Texas, Durance has no discernible accent. Based on Devil and what we’ve heard of Xoti, Readceras is clearly supposed to represent Appalachia.

Well Durance was a traveling preacher. Maybe his accent got diluted from all the wandering?

 

 

EDIT: In fact there's a great meme image about the downfall of RPGs that illustrates this very nostalgiac delusion. I can't find it at the moment but it goes like this. It's from the act two climax of Planescape: Torment, a game all agree is a roleplaying masterpiece. Ravel is asking the Big Thematic Question of the main character: What can change the nature of a man? There's something like 30 responses the player can give. The writers went out of their way to accommodate as many takeaways of the question the player could conceivably had as possible.

Ravel responds exactly the same way no matter which of these dozens of options the player picks. Whoever made the image didn't show that part.

Just as an aside, no "all" do not agree.  I think planescape: torment is the most over hyped insult to the campaign world it is named after that ever was.  It had crap gameplay, the"philosophy" was often sophomoric and pedantic, and quite frankly the game was 100% style over substance.  No thank you.

 

Your example is great though because it shows why Dragon Age is actually better.  See the thing is, your three options are limited to only three, and they are sort of corny, but the person you are talking to actually responds differently to each option.  Unlike planescape torment where you are faced with the illusion of choice.

 

As for this announcement, that's fine, if they could budget it all good with me.  As long as they avoided the Bethesda Water Cooler gimmick where 50-70% of the npcs in the game are just voiced by Bethesda staff and all sound the same.  "Choice" wise it won't be significant because the main character has no voice anyway.  There may be need to record multiple responses but it is still only half the conversation.

 

I wouldn't say Dragon Age 2 is better in most or indeed any respect. Just different. There's still tons of railroading even for an RPG. It's slightly more responsive within a given conversation than Torment on the whole, maybe, but the writing is significantly worse (though I think Torment's writing is overrated. Avellone's best work was KOTOR 2), so I call it a lateral move.

 

I haven't seen a downfall of the rpg genre, I've just seen a "different" rise...

 

Planescape Torment and Baldurs Gate 2 are definitely over hyped and not in any way better than rpg's today, just different. One misconception among nostalgic rpg-enthusiasts (well Crpg era gamers to be more precise) is that there is less handholding, more difficulty, more strategy and more freedom in IE games than we have now - of course, this isn't true but there's always that gamer's definition of what freedom "should" be. What writing "should" be like or what topics it would touch on. The rpg's especially the 3 person made indie games which I have played easily match the quality of an old IE game but the length may be shorter.

 

Point being, writing hasn't degressed in game, there's only so much you can do when adding full VO, that's a given. Technology still hasn't caught up to where devs can do all and of course budget is another factor.

 

This was definitely a smart move for Obsidian, it will definitely heighten sales on consoles which I believe to be one of the main decisions behind this choice. Especially since console sales for Pillars 1 was deathly abysmal (very VERY shockingly poor).

 

As someone who loves to read, I read a bit too much om screen as it is, at home or at work, on paper too. So this is welcoming for me as my eyes will hurt less. "This is one of those things where everyone wins".

Baldur's Gate 1/2 are great examples of nostalgia at work. People criticize modern Bioware's writing heavily, often rightly so...but many of these same people seem to think that they used to be much better at it. Baldur's Gate has all the same tropes as Mass Effect or Dragon Age, executed to pretty much the same level of quality. Planescape: Torment meanwhile was a truly different game experience, which is rare in any age, regardless of quality.

 

I will say that I think RPGs, and video games in general, have on the whole changed a lot over this span of time; simultaneously going for a much more cinematic feel and leaning more towards instant gratification than deep involvement. For me the former has good and bad aspects, while the latter is almost entirely bad. So I'm sympathetic to this feeling that RPGs have passed their golden age. I just try to be realistic about it.

 

That said I doubt this was primarily done with console players in mind. I doubt Obsidian is doing much of anything with Pillars with console players in mind. This kind of game is just very poorly suited to a controller and as far as I can tell Obsidian is content to let any company that wants to give porting it a shot free reign if they dump some money on them, but isn't itself invested in it at all.

Edited April 14, 2018 by The Sharmat

[SonicMage117]

Keep in mind that Deadfire was planned with console ports/versions in mind whereas Pillars 1, consoles were just an after thought. Unfortunately for Obsidian, this reflected in the ports of the first game but with Deadfire, just as much thought for pc audience also went equally for console gamers.

 

One of the main reasons, I'd suppose, being the majority of backers or fans of the original (like myself) asked for full VO so I'd say overall that is probably the main reason. Also to follow the new set bar that Larian did effortlessly. How will it pan out for Obsidian? I know not but Deadfire has to be better than the first game if not anything, or at least wesa hope

[bleedthefreak]

Keep in mind that Deadfire was planned with console ports/versions in mind whereas Pillars 1, consoles were just an after thought. Unfortunately for Obsidian, this reflected in the ports of the first game but with Deadfire, just as much thought for pc audience also went equally for console gamers.

 

This has been officially denied multiple times, it's a PC game first and then the publisher ports it over to console, as stated by Josh Sawyer.

[SonicMage117]

 

Keep in mind that Deadfire was planned with console ports/versions in mind whereas Pillars 1, consoles were just an after thought. Unfortunately for Obsidian, this reflected in the ports of the first game but with Deadfire, just as much thought for pc audience also went equally for console gamers.

This has been officially denied multiple times, it's a PC game first and then the publisher ports it over to console, as stated by Josh Sawyer.

Yeah but there were already plans to port it to consoles, unlike the first game which was ported to consoles long after release. I didn't say it wasn't a pc game first, just that consoles were not an afterthought this time. Obsidian obviously learned from past mistake and sees the potential in console market. They want to succeed where Pillars 1 miserably failed with this.

[algroth]

 

 

Keep in mind that Deadfire was planned with console ports/versions in mind whereas Pillars 1, consoles were just an after thought. Unfortunately for Obsidian, this reflected in the ports of the first game but with Deadfire, just as much thought for pc audience also went equally for console gamers.

This has been officially denied multiple times, it's a PC game first and then the publisher ports it over to console, as stated by Josh Sawyer.

Yeah but there were already plans to port it to consoles, unlike the first game which was ported to consoles long after release. I didn't say it wasn't a pc game first, just that consoles were not an afterthought this time. Obsidian obviously learned from past mistake and sees the potential in console market. They want to succeed where Pillars 1 miserably failed with this.

 

The console port to the first game occured post-Fig campaign and was done by Paradox. Following its success Obsidian/Versus Evil looked into doing a port for Deadfire but this is after months of work and as a project that won't even be done by Obsidian themselves but by Red Cerberus. Their focus is still exclusively on the PC version and that is all that was originally planned for. As stated by Josh several times already.

[The Sharmat]

I swear I remember them denying any plans to do a console port for PoE 2 a year or so ago. I don't think it was originally their intent, but if some other studio wants to put in the work and pay them royalties, why not?

 

I'm also skeptical that they did full VO because the majority of backers asked for it. The feel I get online is that it's a divisive issue among the grognard types most likely to be backers. But then I'm kind of confused about this in general. This is apparently a new development, or they'd have been trumpeting it from the rooftops for ages. But isn't voice over work usually one of the first things finalized in this industry?

Edited April 14, 2018 by The Sharmat

[SonicMage117]

 

 

 

Keep in mind that Deadfire was planned with console ports/versions in mind whereas Pillars 1, consoles were just an after thought. Unfortunately for Obsidian, this reflected in the ports of the first game but with Deadfire, just as much thought for pc audience also went equally for console gamers.

This has been officially denied multiple times, it's a PC game first and then the publisher ports it over to console, as stated by Josh Sawyer.

Yeah but there were already plans to port it to consoles, unlike the first game which was ported to consoles long after release. I didn't say it wasn't a pc game first, just that consoles were not an afterthought this time. Obsidian obviously learned from past mistake and sees the potential in console market. They want to succeed where Pillars 1 miserably failed with this.

The console port to the first game occured post-Fig campaign and was done by Paradox. Following its success Obsidian/Versus Evil looked into doing a port for Deadfire but this is after months of work and as a project that won't even be done by Obsidian themselves but by Red Cerberus. Their focus is still exclusively on the PC version and that is all that was originally planned for. As stated by Josh several times already.

That's bad news then for console gamers, I mean. I expect it to do just as poorly as the first and quite frankly am very surprised that it will even be attempted at all.

 

On the other hand, better for pc gamers but we will still complain about the progresses of nature in the development of Deadfire so I'll drink to that at least.

[The Sharmat]

Well the mere fact that there is a console port will be used as evidence that the game was dumbed down and a complete disaster, I'm sure. But realistically, is this bad news for console players? You simply can't do this kind of game with a controller as an interface without making major compromises in gameplay. See the original Dragon Age for an earnest attempt to do it, then compare it to PoE. Unless they were willing to practically move the game to a different subgenre of RPG, the console port is predestined to be lackluster.

 

Still, it can't be as bad as Starcraft 64.

[Sedrefilos]

Keep in mind that Deadfire was planned with console ports/versions in mind whereas Pillars 1, consoles were just an after thought. Unfortunately for Obsidian, this reflected in the ports of the first game but with Deadfire, just as much thought for pc audience also went equally for console gamers.

 

One of the main reasons, I'd suppose, being the majority of backers or fans of the original (like myself) asked for full VO so I'd say overall that is probably the main reason. Also to follow the new set bar that Larian did effortlessly. How will it pan out for Obsidian? I know not but Deadfire has to be better than the first game if not anything, or at least wesa hope

 

I'd say the main reason is because most people prefer characters to sound as people that to read as books.

[Sedrefilos]

I swear I remember them denying any plans to do a console port for PoE 2 a year or so ago. I don't think it was originally their intent, but if some other studio wants to put in the work and pay them royalties, why not?

 

I'm also skeptical that they did full VO because the majority of backers asked for it. The feel I get online is that it's a divisive issue among the grognard types most likely to be backers. But then I'm kind of confused about this in general. This is apparently a new development, or they'd have been trumpeting it from the rooftops for ages. But isn't voice over work usually one of the first things finalized in this industry?

 

Larian did it with DOS2 and they got the ultra-kudos from everyone so the bar was raised. Obsidian had to at least reach it if not overpass it.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Sedrefilos

[AndreaColombo]

Same argument could be made for audio books versus actual books, since the characters in books are mostly people. Not a very good argument.

[Sedrefilos]

Same argument could be made for audio books versus actual books, since the characters in books are mostly people. Not a very good argument.

 

Video games are not books. Are meant to be played not read.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Sedrefilos

[The Sharmat]

Same argument could be made for audio books versus actual books, since the characters in books are mostly people. Not a very good argument.

This would be a better comparison if Deadfire was a one man show where Mercer played every single character.

[Wormerine]

Baldur's Gate 1/2 are great examples of nostalgia at work. People criticize modern Bioware's writing heavily, often rightly so...but many of these same people seem to think that they used to be much better at it. Baldur's Gate has all the same tropes as Mass Effect or Dragon Age, executed to pretty much the same level of quality. Planescape: Torment meanwhile was a truly different game experience, which is rare in any age, regardless of quality.

 

You can’t take any work out of the context it was made. Even though BGs might not hold up in all aspect they were creative and innovative at its time. Yes, BG shares the same issues that later Boware games have but it was the first one. Poor morality system is usually a Bioware issue, but it took couple games before I really starting to get annoyed with it. Just like Ubisoft Open World game is something I despise, even though I enjoyed Far Cry3 ad original AssCreed. Continue doing the same thing over and over again and it becomes stale, and its issue become more apparent. And as far as writing - the thing is while BGs are corny they are better written than Dragon Age, in big part because they are corny. Dragon Age tries to be more serious but it didn’t click for me. Characters behaved like idiots, lore was unimaginative and dull, conflict was very forced, darkspawn was an incredibly boring antagonist.

[The Sharmat]

Point taken. I guess there's an assumption that when someone does something over and over again they'll improve, and I guess you really shouldn't judge a first effort by the same standards as a fifth effort.

[algroth]

 

Same argument could be made for audio books versus actual books, since the characters in books are mostly people. Not a very good argument.

 

Video games are not books. Are meant to be played not read.

 

 

I wouldn't consider reading and playing to be actions in opposition, or mutually exclusive. I'm not arguing in favour or against full VO, mind, I'm just more than a bit tired of seeing this argument made with regards to any game with lots of text.

[The Sharmat]

Ok but how do you feel about the Mercer one man show?

[algroth]

 

Baldur's Gate 1/2 are great examples of nostalgia at work. People criticize modern Bioware's writing heavily, often rightly so...but many of these same people seem to think that they used to be much better at it. Baldur's Gate has all the same tropes as Mass Effect or Dragon Age, executed to pretty much the same level of quality. Planescape: Torment meanwhile was a truly different game experience, which is rare in any age, regardless of quality.

You can’t take any work out of the context it was made. Even though BGs might not hold up in all aspect they were creative and innovative at its time. Yes, BG shares the same issues that later Boware games have but it was the first one. Poor morality system is usually a Bioware issue, but it took couple games before I really starting to get annoyed with it. Just like Ubisoft Open World game is something I despise, even though I enjoyed Far Cry3 ad original AssCreed. Continue doing the same thing over and over again and it becomes stale, and its issue become more apparent. And as far as writing - the thing is while BGs are corny they are better written than Dragon Age, in big part because they are corny. Dragon Age tries to be more serious but it didn’t click for me. Characters behaved like idiots, lore was unimaginative and dull, conflict was very forced, darkspawn was an incredibly boring antagonist.

 

 

Whilst I haven't played Mass Effect so I cannot comment on it specifically, I agree here that Baldur's Gate is pretty different to Dragon Age in tone and intention and the style of writing has to be taken into consideration within that given context. In Baldur's Gate the atmosphere is a lot more whimsical and light-hearted, where the "darkness" is usually only really the sort that you'd find in a classic adventure tale - in many ways the tone is quite more reminiscent of a Princess Bride or a Hobbit than a Lord of the Rings for example. Dragon Age is usually a lot more obvious and upfront about its lofty and grand intentions, and the tone is more the likes of an inflated epic with a touch of Game of Thrones-like grit and moral greyness, and in this context the corniness usually very earnest and for the sake of the grand and pompous tone the games are after, not for the touch of self-depreciating whimsy of the former. Baldur's Gate is no literary masterpiece but the writing is usually full of personality, charm and wit, whereas Dragon Age is pretty flat and unmemorable in comparison, and generally rather oblivious of its own preposterousness.

[algroth]

Ok but how do you feel about the Mercer one man show?

 

I have no qualms or issues with my suspense of disbelief when listening to an audio book so I guess I would have to experience it in the context of an iso-RPG to have an opinion either way on it. But that's the issue with different artistic media as well: when playing the first Pillars or any of the IE games, I didn't feel like non-voiced dialogue "read as books" instead of "sounding like people". I could fill in the performance for what I read with a little, effortless bit of imagination and that was that. To me that's just an approach to representing a scene that is just as valid and not at all more alienating or what have you than having the scene actually voiced. I guess that to hear no actor or a single actor perform each voice in the conversation would constitute as some manner of abstraction, and maybe in the latter it might take a few tries to get used to, but I hardly feel like it'd be so jarring or abstract so as to disallow immersion or suspension of disbelief. Likewise I'd say a lot of it would hinge on the execution, and to this I would also add that the success of each are also entirely valid and interesting and impressive in their own ways.

 

But take my own stance on the matter with a pinch of salt. I love art that plays with unconventional and abstract means of representation so I've grown rather used to reading a scene in far more obscure or codified cases than the above.

Edited April 14, 2018 by algroth

[Guest]

Ok but how do you feel about the Mercer one man show?

Help me understand where this is coming from. Mercer voices a couple of characters who most people were shocked to learned were produced by the same guy. Even the guy who does Maerwald does an admirable job of sounding like *actually* different people

[algroth]

 

Ok but how do you feel about the Mercer one man show?

Help me understand where this is coming from. Mercer voices a couple of characters who most people were shocked to learned were produced by the same guy. Even the guy who does Maerwald does an admirable job of sounding like *actually* different people

 

It is a hypothetical scenario that would allegedly correspond more to AndreaColombo's statement that the "same argument could be made for audio books versus actual books, since the characters in books are mostly people".

[The Sharmat]

It was a joke.