Aonuma never considered VA for LoZ:SS plus more!
This topic is locked from further discussion.
lol I have to agree with this.[QUOTE="Sepewrath"][QUOTE="meetroid8"] That makes no sense at all.Cruse34
it creates a world that is the way you want it. You can take your time, do stuff when you want, name your character whatever, etc
That's still possible for a game even with voice acting; the only time you'd probably hear anything is when you're speaking to other characters, and that's either by choice when you're interacting with an NPC or during a mandatory cutscene. Not exactly the most valid argument against the idea of Zelda having VAs.
That being said, it wouldn't really bother me too much either way. I'm not one of those people that thinks having VAs would be "keeping up with the times" for the series, which I find a borderline non-sensical point for a series that is as beloved as the Zelda series with as minimal voicing that has been present in the series thus far. The only thing I hope for is that if Nintendo ever decides to take the route of voice-overs, it gets the thing right, but this isn't exactly an area Nintendo has the best track record with.
Although... I wouldn't mind hearing a few more "Ka-boom!"s in a Zelda game again... :P
The only thing I hope for is that if Nintendo ever decides to take the route of voice-overs, it gets the thing right, but this isn't exactly an area Nintendo has the best track record with.Madmangamer364
True. I'd much rather have no voice acting than half-assed voice acting. Especially in Zelda.
Although... I wouldn't mind hearing a few more "Ka-boom!"s in a Zelda game again... :PMadmangamer364
:lol: I love that guy! "Spliiiisch!"
I guess people thought his cap would sprout wings like Mario, which would allow him to soar through the sky...:lol: I not one of the people that thought he would fly, but the trailer of him jumping off a cliff, I would be hopeful that he would fly otherwise that is probably the end of our hero, also the title "sky"ward sword, would suggest he is going to be in the sky in some bits of the game[QUOTE="DJ-Lafleur"]
And who thought Link was going to fly like Pit? :lol:
tocool340
Miyamoto did this late in the Twilight Princess development process by suggesting that wolf Link should have a companion on his back because watching a wolf run from behind looks very boring. They added Midna at that point, which obviously changed a lot about the story and even the game mechanics.
JordanElek
I guess Miyamoto has no idea of what "Okami" is, then.
[QUOTE="JordanElek"]
Miyamoto did this late in the Twilight Princess development process by suggesting that wolf Link should have a companion on his back because watching a wolf run from behind looks very boring. They added Midna at that point, which obviously changed a lot about the story and even the game mechanics.
Nintendo_Fan128
I guess Miyamoto has no idea of what "Okami" is, then.
but if you look at okami, it's not simply a wolf running. it's a wolf made of ink with a plate on fire over its back that leaves a trace of flowers and wind when running.[QUOTE="Nintendo_Fan128"][QUOTE="JordanElek"]
Miyamoto did this late in the Twilight Princess development process by suggesting that wolf Link should have a companion on his back because watching a wolf run from behind looks very boring. They added Midna at that point, which obviously changed a lot about the story and even the game mechanics.
BrunoBRS
I guess Miyamoto has no idea of what "Okami" is, then.
but if you look at okami, it's not simply a wolf running. it's a wolf made of ink with a plate on fire over its back that leaves a trace of flowers and wind when running.that doesn't make it any better
but if you look at okami, it's not simply a wolf running. it's a wolf made of ink with a plate on fire over its back that leaves a trace of flowers and wind when running.[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Fan128"]
I guess Miyamoto has no idea of what "Okami" is, then.
Cruse34
that doesn't make it any better
miyamoto said "just a wolf walking is boring". okami obviously has more than that.Ugh, Nintendo has to keep up with the times. An action adventure game like Zelda definitely should have voice acting, it'd make it a lot more atmospheric.
Nintendo_Fan128
Play Metroid Prime and then tell me that voice acting would have made it more atmospheric.
[QUOTE="Nintendo_Fan128"]1.- Play the CDi games. 2.- Return (if you can and dare) and 3.- Tell me if it's a good idea to have VA in Zelda.Ugh, Nintendo has to keep up with the times. An action adventure game like Zelda definitely should have voice acting, it'd make it a lot more atmospheric.
King_Dodongo
It's been 15+ years, get over the CDi games.
The voice acting in high production games is usually very good. Metroid Prime 3, an example I will keep going back too, had superb voice acting and Samus didn't speak. It still kept all the atmosphere of the previous titles.
I think this is dumb. I don't need voice acting to truly enjoy Zelda. But do I want it? Yes. Do i think it could work? Of course. I think this is a big mistake.
I honestly don't believe for a second that all these people going "yay! no voice acting" really believe it. And if they do, wait until there's huge epic scores, big action sequences and cutscenes, and not a lick of voice acting. It will be painfully noticeable.
Well like I said in my last post, get ready for an onslaught from the media about how archaic text is and Nintendo refusing to get with the times, and how they don't understand it after Corruption and even more so, Other M etc etc. I don't blame Nintendo for just ignoring it, the Zelda fanbase, all it does is complain and about opposite ends of the spectrum at that. And I don't mean like two groups, I mean the exact same people lol. For example they say "This game is too red, I hate it" next game "what happened to all the red, I hate it" :P very reminiscent of post OoT before TP and then post TP. If they added VA it would just give them a new avenue to moan about. Might as well just leave it at text and have them complain about the one thing.That being said, it wouldn't really bother me too much either way. I'm not one of those people that thinks having VAs would be "keeping up with the times" for the series, which I find a borderline non-sensical point for a series that is as beloved as the Zelda series with as minimal voicing that has been present in the series thus far. The only thing I hope for is that if Nintendo ever decides to take the route of voice-overs, it gets the thing right, but this isn't exactly an area Nintendo has the best track record with
Madmangamer364
[QUOTE="Nintendo_Fan128"]
Ugh, Nintendo has to keep up with the times. An action adventure game like Zelda definitely should have voice acting, it'd make it a lot more atmospheric.
neildneil
Play Metroid Prime and then tell me that voice acting would have made it more atmospheric.
The Metroid series and Zelda series are aiming for very different things and very different atmospheres. Voice acting would work for Zelda.
[QUOTE="JordanElek"]
Miyamoto did this late in the Twilight Princess development process by suggesting that wolf Link should have a companion on his back because watching a wolf run from behind looks very boring. They added Midna at that point, which obviously changed a lot about the story and even the game mechanics.
Nintendo_Fan128
I guess Miyamoto has no idea of what "Okami" is, then.
Well, here's the direct quote. I was just going by memory before:When we were discussing the wolf's design, Miyamoto-san said: "It's no fun to just look at the back of a four-legged animal all the time." It's true that with a four-legged animal, if you look sideways on or from an angle, you can clearly see the motion of the legs and the overall way the character moves. But if you look directly from behind, it looks really boring compared to a human character's movements. So Miyamoto-san told us to have someone riding the wolf. At the early stages, we went for a very unassuming character on the wolf's back, but by the end we had made this character occupy a central place in the game.Keisuki Nishimori
I guess you could say that the Okami people probably noticed the same issue, so they added a bunch of stuff to the animation, like Bruno said. That's one way to do it, and adding something to its back is another way. I don't really think that it's a big deal to just watch a wolf running, either, but I'm glad they made that change.
It's a good example of how a game can grow based on the concept of core functionality. Miyamoto is apparently really adamant about this to the internal Nintendo devs. Ideas need to be born out of their functionality in the game.
For voice acting, there needs to be some sort of core functionality to justify its use. At this point, the core functionality of dialogue is to make a connection with the player, like I said before, and simply voicing the traditional styIe of Zelda text would only subtract from that connection. So I can only see them adding voice acting if it serves a functional purpose that doesn't take away from the current functional purpose of the written dialogue.
[QUOTE="wiifan001"][QUOTE="Sepewrath"] lol I have to agree with this. meetroid8I think what he's trying to say is that voice acting would take away the feel of the Zelda feel. The whole Zelda world is a fantasy, based on imagination. Voice acting would take away any sort of imagination of yours, I just stated above, about how the voice work should go. Being on progress in an acting major, a voice given to me the questions go as: Was the voice good? Is it believable? Does it match the character's wants and needs? Usually it's a yes, no, sort of kind of deal. Whereas as a character with gestures and appearance, with text at the bottom, gives a question of: How do you imagine this character to give the certain material that the character speaks, How do you make it sound fitting and believeable? Do people really imagine up voices for all of the different characters? That seems a little crazy. I don't see how imaginary voices could ever be better than real voices, but to each his own I guess. Hey, those actors need to seriously study and focus on the characters down to the wants and needs to gestures, tone of voice, and in addition to mass depth. Those voice actors don't just read it and say it aloud. I take the time to think what voice fits the characters, and when I do discover what fits just right for a character, it adds to the whole fantasy world thing, and as much as getting more interactive playing the video game. Some characters are harder than others, but finding out what works well makes it all worth it :)
[QUOTE="Madmangamer364"]Well like I said in my last post, get ready for an onslaught from the media about how archaic text is and Nintendo refusing to get with the times, and how they don't understand it after Corruption and even more so, Other M etc etc. I don't blame Nintendo for just ignoring it, the Zelda fanbase, all it does is complain and about opposite ends of the spectrum at that. And I don't mean like two groups, I mean the exact same people lol. For example they say "This game is too red, I hate it" next game "what happened to all the red, I hate it" :P very reminiscent of post OoT before TP and then post TP. If they added VA it would just give them a new avenue to moan about. Might as well just leave it at text and have them complain about the one thing.That being said, it wouldn't really bother me too much either way. I'm not one of those people that thinks having VAs would be "keeping up with the times" for the series, which I find a borderline non-sensical point for a series that is as beloved as the Zelda series with as minimal voicing that has been present in the series thus far. The only thing I hope for is that if Nintendo ever decides to take the route of voice-overs, it gets the thing right, but this isn't exactly an area Nintendo has the best track record with
Sepewrath
Oh, I'm ready, and not just from the media, but from the gaming community that will follow that very same bandwagon. It's not as if Nintendo isn't used to hearing a complaint or another about SOMETHING and still find itself and even the product(s) in question do well, so I expect it'll just see this as another one of those situations where the less-than-flattering comments will go right over the company's head, especially once SS is released and does well. In any case, I'm sure that if this was a pressing concern for Nintendo, it would actually be strongly focusing on trying to get quality voice work for the game, but as you alluded to, doing so for the sake of those who complain about such things rarely bodes well.
I agree that voice acting should not be in Zelda. There is a lot of nonsense dialogue which is fine for text. I can hear the voice for the happy mask shop owner now. Most of the voices would probably be the quality of old saturday morning cartoons. I don't think Zelda needs that. Especially if they are going to have a fairy or some kind of guide speak to you and say the same things over and over again, voice acting would be bad. Can you imagine if they had voice acting in Ocarina of Time. Saria would be annoying as ever and so would have the owl that kept asking if youw wanted to hear what he had to say again. If they did have voice acting only Zelda and the final Boss (If ganon) should have one. We don't need one for all the towns people.
^Once again, I cant get behind this idea. Just because there would be voice acting in the game, doesn't mean it would be bad voice acting. Its not 1995 anymore, bad voice acting is actually pretty uncommon these days, it generally good or at the very least adequate. There aren't many games that venture into RE1 on the PS1 bad, like whats that game called? Arc Rise something or another? Those things really stand out now, because that's not suppose to happen anymore.
Also your OoT examples don't really mean much as Navi did have an actual voice "Listen" and the Owl only asked that do you want him to repeat everything because you could fast scroll the the text, that wouldn't be an issue with a VO. Not to mention him asking if you wanted him to repeat it could have still be a menu and not spoken. So the whole "I don't want voice acting because it could be bad" thing doesn't make sense. That's like me saying i don't want them to make Skyward Sword because it might not be good. It wouldn't make much sense for only two people to have voice work in a game, either everyone who speaks or no one.
If it was done well, In wouldn't be against the idea of important NPC's having VA's. Link I want to remain silent though. he's always been the silent protagonist that I could put my own character and imagination into, and I want it to stay that way.
SOLUTION: Options screen has two options:
VOICE ACTING MODE
and
PANTOMIME EDITION
Everyone wins
[QUOTE="Shadowtails9000"]Since we in dreamland, can we have a EASY and REAL mode? With REAL mode making monsters do more than half a hearts damage.... Its Nintendo, enemies won't do more than half a hearts damage until Godly Legend Ridiculously Hard Mode.SOLUTION: Options screen has two options:
VOICE ACTING MODE
and
PANTOMIME EDITION
Everyone wins
locopatho
^Once again, I cant get behind this idea. Just because there would be voice acting in the game, doesn't mean it would be bad voice acting. Its not 1995 anymore, bad voice acting is actually pretty uncommon these days, it generally good or at the very least adequate. There aren't many games that venture into RE1 on the PS1 bad, like whats that game called? Arc Rise something or another? Those things really stand out now, because that's not suppose to happen anymore.
Also your OoT examples don't really mean much as Navi did have an actual voice "Listen" and the Owl only asked that do you want him to repeat everything because you could fast scroll the the text, that wouldn't be an issue with a VO. Not to mention him asking if you wanted him to repeat it could have still be a menu and not spoken. So the whole "I don't want voice acting because it could be bad" thing doesn't make sense. That's like me saying i don't want them to make Skyward Sword because it might not be good. It wouldn't make much sense for only two people to have voice work in a game, either everyone who speaks or no one.
Sepewrath
[QUOTE="Shadowtails9000"]Since we in dreamland, can we have a EASY and REAL mode? With REAL mode making monsters do more than half a hearts damage.... Both of these would be epic. I miss the lttp days when bosses would make you really have to focus and heart piece collecting was important, back then you got touched and lost at least 3 hearts, attacks up to 5 hearts later on. Now ganondorf takes a heart at most. And also it is possible for voice acting to be good like mentioned above, also not all NPCs have to talk, they can just put VA for important scenesSOLUTION: Options screen has two options:
VOICE ACTING MODE
and
PANTOMIME EDITION
Everyone wins
locopatho
[QUOTE="Nintendo_Fan128"][QUOTE="JordanElek"]
Miyamoto did this late in the Twilight Princess development process by suggesting that wolf Link should have a companion on his back because watching a wolf run from behind looks very boring. They added Midna at that point, which obviously changed a lot about the story and even the game mechanics.
BrunoBRS
I guess Miyamoto has no idea of what "Okami" is, then.
but if you look at okami, it's not simply a wolf running. it's a wolf made of ink with a plate on fire over its back that leaves a trace of flowers and wind when running.Hm, you do have a point. But anyway, I don't think it'd be "boring" to see a wolf running, I don't see anything wrong with that.
^Once again, I cant get behind this idea. Just because there would be voice acting in the game, doesn't mean it would be bad voice acting. Its not 1995 anymore, bad voice acting is actually pretty uncommon these days, it generally good or at the very least adequate. There aren't many games that venture into RE1 on the PS1 bad, like whats that game called? Arc Rise something or another? Those things really stand out now, because that's not suppose to happen anymore.
Also your OoT examples don't really mean much as Navi did have an actual voice "Listen" and the Owl only asked that do you want him to repeat everything because you could fast scroll the the text, that wouldn't be an issue with a VO. Not to mention him asking if you wanted him to repeat it could have still be a menu and not spoken. So the whole "I don't want voice acting because it could be bad" thing doesn't make sense. That's like me saying i don't want them to make Skyward Sword because it might not be good. It wouldn't make much sense for only two people to have voice work in a game, either everyone who speaks or no one.
Sepewrath
Have you play tales of symphonia 2, Devil May Cry 4, and Tales of Vesperia? Everybody's voice is symphonia is pretty bad. Quite a few people's voice in Tales of Vesperia could have been better. The lines in devil may cry 4 were so cheesy and the voices for them were not that great. Bad voice acting still plagues games today. Hardly any game has voice acting like Heavenly Sword or Uncharted.
All I am saying is that a lot of the lines in Zelda sometimes can be corny like in Wind Waker where that crew member kept calling you swabbie. I am not bashing the game because it has corny lines because that is part of the charm, but hearing those lines spoken out loud would be annoying. I would rather them spend money on making the game have a great design then all characters except link have a voice. Most characters have a limited personality in Zelda and are not part of the main storyline so, it's not a big deal if they have voices or not. Just because Bathesda did it with Elder Scrolls and Fallout doesn't mean everyone else has to do it.
Nintendo has always been about gameplay over story. The story for Zelda is not that deep and wouldn't benefit from voice acting. You are a fairy boy from a forest and you have to save the kingdom of hyrule from a evil sorcerer named ganon. Voice acting would not give this a more epic feel. Maybe in certain spots it might be ok, but as a whole, no it would not do much.
Have you ever played Mass Effect, Uncharted, Arkham Asylum, Assassins Creed, do you think every line in those game are literary genius? It doesn't matter what the dialogue is, if that was the case, all comedy in games would be an absolute pain to hear voice acted. Things like NMH with all of its intentional shenanigans basically your saying should be all text. Bad dialogue is bad dialogue, whether its written or spoken. If you can deal with cheesy dialogue in the written form, it shouldn't make a difference if its spoken. Also the story doesn't matter, Uncharted has the most common, cliche story you've ever seen, not so different from save the princess, yet you applaud its voice acting.
Lastly, putting more emphasis on story doesn't mean you cant focus on gameplay i.e. every 3D Zelda including Ocarina of Time, Metroid, they even tried pushing in a little story elements in Galaxy and none of the games have suffered for it. Also toss in your examples of Heavenly Sword and Uncharted, add a few more; Bioshock, Prince of Persia, Metal Gear Solid, I could probably do this all day. Your reasoning for Zelda not having voice acting applies to just about every game, so there is little reason for Zelda not to have it besides preference of the developers.
]I miss the lttp days when bosses would make you really have to focus and heart piece collecting was important, back then you got touched and lost at least 3 hearts, attacks up to 5 hearts later on. Now ganondorf takes a heart at most. And also it is possible for voice acting to be good like mentioned above, also not all NPCs have to talk, they can just put VA for important scenesdonaldo1989
It was like that because, it took 5 minute to get through a dungeon in the 2D Zelda's if you died, it takes a lot longer in the 3D Zelda's and it would be annoying to have to keep treking back and forth through because you died. Why do you think hack n slash games and FPS have so many checkpoints? because they are games where you die a lot and no one wants to have keep running through stages over and over.
[QUOTE="donaldo1989"]]I miss the lttp days when bosses would make you really have to focus and heart piece collecting was important, back then you got touched and lost at least 3 hearts, attacks up to 5 hearts later on. Now ganondorf takes a heart at most. And also it is possible for voice acting to be good like mentioned above, also not all NPCs have to talk, they can just put VA for important scenesSepewrath
It was like that because, it took 5 minute to get through a dungeon in the 2D Zelda's if you died, it takes a lot longer in the 3D Zelda's and it would be annoying to have to keep treking back and forth through because you died. Why do you think hack n slash games and FPS have so many checkpoints? because they are games where you die a lot and no one wants to have keep running through stages over and over.
Yeah, the checkpoints you mentioned would make things fine... Die at boss, respawn and fight boss again. Not too tricky. Sick of Zelda having amazing looking gigantic monsters who promptly die after a few hits, with me having 90% health....
Have you ever played Mass Effect, Uncharted, Arkham Asylum, Assassins Creed, do you think every line in those game are literary genius? It doesn't matter what the dialogue is, if that was the case, all comedy in games would be an absolute pain to hear voice acted. Things like NMH with all of its intentional shenanigans basically your saying should be all text. Bad dialogue is bad dialogue, whether its written or spoken. If you can deal with cheesy dialogue in the written form, it shouldn't make a difference if its spoken. Also the story doesn't matter, Uncharted has the most common, cliche story you've ever seen, not so different from save the princess, yet you applaud its voice acting.
Lastly, putting more emphasis on story doesn't mean you cant focus on gameplay i.e. every 3D Zelda including Ocarina of Time, Metroid, they even tried pushing in a little story elements in Galaxy and none of the games have suffered for it. Also toss in your examples of Heavenly Sword and Uncharted, add a few more; Bioshock, Prince of Persia, Metal Gear Solid, I could probably do this all day. Your reasoning for Zelda not having voice acting applies to just about every game, so there is little reason for Zelda not to have it besides preference of the developers.
[QUOTE="donaldo1989"]]I miss the lttp days when bosses would make you really have to focus and heart piece collecting was important, back then you got touched and lost at least 3 hearts, attacks up to 5 hearts later on. Now ganondorf takes a heart at most. And also it is possible for voice acting to be good like mentioned above, also not all NPCs have to talk, they can just put VA for important scenesSepewrath
It was like that because, it took 5 minute to get through a dungeon in the 2D Zelda's if you died, it takes a lot longer in the 3D Zelda's and it would be annoying to have to keep treking back and forth through because you died. Why do you think hack n slash games and FPS have so many checkpoints? because they are games where you die a lot and no one wants to have keep running through stages over and over.
and your reasoning to have it makes sense? Everybody else is doing well I guess we should do it too. Zelda doesn't need it. Why waste money on something that wouldn't make the game any better. Games like Bioshock and and Mass effect were built with voice acting in mind. Zelda was not. Nintendo built protagonists without voices for a reason. They wanted their characters to be more versatile. Mario is a good example he is able to be in almost any game because he doesn't have a voice to go with his personality. Could a character like Kratos or, Nathan Drake be in any type of game genre? No because they have a voice which brings out their personality. Nintndo builds characters that can do anything because they don't have personalities. They don't bother going in depth with who people are or their background. Metroid is a little of an exception. They want to continue it with Zelda. You give characters voices that would give them personality and that is bad for what Nintendo does.
I haven't seen a story like Uncharted in a video game before. Sure I have seen it in books and in movies but in video games this type of story is a little light. If this story is so common in video games what games have an average joe, his man's man buddy, and some girl that wants to prove her self as far as gaming is concerned? Most video games you are a character with something different about him or her than the others. Even if the story is cliche the voice acting of the story is pretty well done.
To actually think would go for high cinematic productions is ridiculous. Since when has Nintendo ever done that? Everytime Nintendo has gone for the cinematic with voice acting approach, they screwed. Do we not remember slippy from star fox 64. F-Zero GX was rather bad with the voice acting and the story for falcon. Have you heard the voice of Vanille in Final Fantasy 13? There are just as many examples of bad voice acting as there are that are good. Since Zelda has very few epic moments outside of pulling out the master sword collecting all the pendants/Crystals to break the shield to ganons lair. There are not enough scenes to warrant top notch voice acting. It is a waste of money.
Metal gear solid 4 does have great acting however they sacrificed gameplay for cutscenes and actors. What the game had of gameplay was great, but even high profile games had to make sacrifices.
We disagree let's call it at that. The game is not having voice acting. Let's have fun with it when it comes out.
Kratos in a racing game? I would laugh my ass off if I ever saw that.Litchie
Exactly my point. No one would ever want that. Kratos has the peronality of being a killer so they would never stick him in a kart racer other than someone specifically making him in modnation. The characters in mario kart don't have personalities so it wouldn't seem silly to put them in there
You know if you actually read my prior post you would see that I said I could care less about voice acting being in the game. I just call out peoples nonsensical reasoning for it not being in, "Oh if its in, it could be bad", "You cant have story and gameplay" and other such ridiculous reasons, like money. Nintendo is not eating Ramen every night and struggling to pay the light bill, they can afford to literally flush money down the toilet if they wanted. Versatility also has no bearing on the situation, Mario has a voice, Mario has a character and Mario has been in everything. Just because a character has a voice doesn't mean they suddenly can only be in action games. You ask could Kratos be in any game? Of course he could. He could be a Sony version of Smash Brothers, he could be a racing game, he could be in an RPG, he could be in a sandbox game, his personality of being a PO'd, God killing maniac in no way restricts the character. MGS4 has great voice acting, perhaps cutscenes that are too long, but its always been like that and its always had great gameplay as well. I would agree, Zelda doesn't NEED VA, but there is no reason it CANT have VA. Sepewrath
What voice does mario have other than going "wah wahoo" when jumping and saying "thank you very much for playing my game" after the credits? What do we know about mario other than he is a good guy who saves the princess. What has mario specifically said about himself?
Yes you could put any character in any type of game you wanted, but to see a cold blooded killer character in a very light hearted plaltformer doesn't make sense.
Other than the fact Miyamoto does not like First Person Shooters do you really think Mario could be an FPS game like Doom or Resistance? No that wouldn't make sense. Could you see Kirby decapitating people?
Fine you are right Zelda could have VA but it would be a waste of money to do it since it wouldn't make the game better or flow more nicely, Just because your rich doesn't mean you should throw away money on an idea that a game is superb without it.
Yeah I think Mario could be in a FPS, he's just an avatar, no matter how in depth or shallow a characters personality is represented, they can be in whatever they want. Take Mega Man, his character is defined, he's been in everything from card games to fighting games. Kratos could be a in racing game, swinging around the blades of chaos on the track like a sociopath would be hilarious and no one would say "Oh Kratos cant be in a racing game because he's Kratos" No they would just laugh at Kratos beating up Drake or something and go on playing their game. You know by your logic, Mario couldn't go from protagonist in DK to antagonist in DK Jr, but you know what, that's exactly what happened. And yeah that "Wahoo" and "Here we go" is Mario's voice, hence the reason Charles Martinet is referred to as the voice of Mario. The same way Ganon has a voice and Zelda has a voice, they just don't use them for conversation. You can not want VA in Zelda, that's fine, a lot of people are right there with you. But come on, your just trying to invent reasons for why it cant be in. Sepewrath
Pretty sure they will change their opinions, mine included if I agree with the voice, once Nintendo release Zelda with VA :P
Yeah I think Mario could be in a FPS, he's just an avatar, no matter how in depth or shallow a characters personality is represented, they can be in whatever they want. Take Mega Man, his character is defined, he's been in everything from card games to fighting games. Kratos could be a in racing game, swinging around the blades of chaos on the track like a sociopath would be hilarious and no one would say "Oh Kratos cant be in a racing game because he's Kratos" No they would just laugh at Kratos beating up Drake or something and go on playing their game. You know by your logic, Mario couldn't go from protagonist in DK to antagonist in DK Jr, but you know what, that's exactly what happened. And yeah that "Wahoo" and "Here we go" is Mario's voice, hence the reason Charles Martinet is referred to as the voice of Mario. The same way Ganon has a voice and Zelda has a voice, they just don't use them for conversation. You can not want VA in Zelda, that's fine, a lot of people are right there with you. But come on, your just trying to invent reasons for why it cant be in. Sepewrath
I never said VA can't be in there. I just said it should not. Developers can do whatever they want, it's their game. They made Magic the gathering the video game for crying out loud and a nerf rail shooter.
You are correct that there is nothing that says they can't do it, but there are things to avoid in order to make things the best they can be. VA would not help Zelda that much if at all. Why waste more money on things would not enhance the franchise. What epic scenes could have been made better by VA? Maybe the Deku tree's story of the triforce could of benefited slightly but would have been a waste of money. So you are saying mario could be a Resistance or Conduit game? Most of the game is white gray and black but it wouldn't seem silly to have Red and blue Mario with full dialogue? I don't see charles marinett yelling to the other members of the team to "watch out", or "get down" Nintendo could do it, but it wouldn't make any sense.
Fine Kratos can be in anything, he was in Hot Shots Golf 5, but only as a goof type of thing. When the next God of War comes out I doubt Kratos will be tearing up the golf courses or helping old ladies across the street in his new adventure. The developers could do it, but it wouldn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense to have VA going beyond grunting and shouting noises.
If your whole point was that Zelda could have real VA because there is nothing stopping them, then all you are doing is stating a given with every game ever created or to be created.
My point is, there is reason that Nintendo should consider doing VA for the game since it wouldn't help it even with the best actors around. Since it cannot help the game in anyway, there is a chance it might hurt it. Normally I hate when Nintendo plays it too safe but for this, they are in the right. If it's not broke don't fix it.
Other games that you and i have mentioned were built with VA in mind, so obviously the game benefited from actors because that was the intention. If Nintendo wanted to start another Zelda series with VA in mind then that would be another story.
But voices would really ruin the game. Zelda is all about the adventure being yours, and doing it your way.
Cruse34
As is Half Life, KOTOR and most WRPGs. Having all NPCs talk and leaving the PC silent contributes to immersion.
[QUOTE="Cruse34"]
But voices would really ruin the game. Zelda is all about the adventure being yours, and doing it your way.
Wikipedian
As is Half Life, KOTOR and most WRPGs. Having all NPCs talk and leaving the PC silent contributes to immersion.
but then the NPCs won't say YOUR name. i can't make an NPC say "hey Bruno, could you please help us deal with the dodongos in Death Mountain?"[QUOTE="Wikipedian"][QUOTE="Cruse34"]
But voices would really ruin the game. Zelda is all about the adventure being yours, and doing it your way.
BrunoBRS
As is Half Life, KOTOR and most WRPGs. Having all NPCs talk and leaving the PC silent contributes to immersion.
but then the NPCs won't say YOUR name. i can't make an NPC say "hey Bruno, could you please help us deal with the dodongos in Death Mountain?"Who cares if the characters don't say your name? It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
but then the NPCs won't say YOUR name. i can't make an NPC say "hey Bruno, could you please help us deal with the dodongos in Death Mountain?"[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="Wikipedian"]
As is Half Life, KOTOR and most WRPGs. Having all NPCs talk and leaving the PC silent contributes to immersion.
VGobbsesser
Who cares if the characters don't say your name? It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
Yeah, and also I usually just name him "Link" anyways...
but then the NPCs won't say YOUR name. i can't make an NPC say "hey Bruno, could you please help us deal with the dodongos in Death Mountain?"[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="Wikipedian"]
As is Half Life, KOTOR and most WRPGs. Having all NPCs talk and leaving the PC silent contributes to immersion.
VGobbsesser
Who cares if the characters don't say your name? It's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
well it's part of the immersion plan of miyamoto. naming a character in your typical WRPG and not naming is the exact same thing. instead of being YOU there, you're just a puppeteer pulling the strings.well it's part of the immersion plan of miyamoto. naming a character in your typical WRPG and not naming is the exact same thing. instead of being YOU there, you're just a puppeteer pulling the strings.BrunoBRS
There are more ways to immerse a person into a game than to just have the other characters in the game say your name,like, you know, having all of the characters in the game actually speak rather than just reading text. That's a really weak argument against voice acting, to be honest.
Well here is some of Aonuma's own reasoning concerning voice acting in Zelda, which is pretty much exactly what Bruno was talking about:There are more ways to immerse a person into a game than to just have the other characters in the game say your name,like, you know, having all of the characters in the game actually speak rather than just reading text. That's a really weak argument against voice acting, to be honest.
VGobbsesser
2002: "We've obviously carried this on from the previous Zelda games. We can express what we want within the game without having to use a lot of voice acting. While I can't say for certain it will always be like that with Zelda games, the way we've done it for The Wind Waker is suitable for the world. Also, as people have played Zelda over the years, they have formed their own ideas of how Link might sound. If we were to put a voice in there that might not match up with someone's image, then there would be a backlash to that. So we've tried to avoid that."
2005: "When the player is reading text on the screen, they're inserting a part of themselves, their imagination, into the reading. They fill out the world. But with fully spoken dialogue, everything about the character becomes fixed in place, and you lose a bit of that imaginative aspect."
2007: "In regard to voice acting, I made a conscious decision not to give Link a voice because Link is actually the player and to give him a voice would alter the experience for the player so I don't think that that will happen anytime soon. Unless, of course, it benefits the gameplay. It's all about gameplay, so it if benefits the gameplay then we would definitely consider including voice acting. There are many games out there that use voice recording and for me, if I were to choose to include voice acting in a Zelda game, it would have to change the game dramatically and make other people realize that it's a completely new way of using voices."
Not sure if you saw my post before, but it was about designing every aspect of a game around functionality. The current functionality of dialogue in Zelda games is outlined above. In order to add voice acting, Nintendo would need to have a BETTER function for it. As it is, it sounds like they just want to keep things the way they are for fear of upsetting fans over something that might only subtract from the functionality of dialogue rather than add to it or improve it.
2005: "When the player is reading text on the screen, they're inserting a part of themselves, their imagination, into the reading. They fill out the world. But with fully spoken dialogue, everything about the character becomes fixed in place, and you lose a bit of that imaginative aspect."
This is exactly what I am getting at. I like to imagine my way into the reading. I develop the character's voice and tone in my mind which brings more into the Zelda universe.2005: "When the player is reading text on the screen, they're inserting a part of themselves, their imagination, into the reading. They fill out the world. But with fully spoken dialogue, everything about the character becomes fixed in place, and you lose a bit of that imaginative aspect."
This is exactly what I am getting at. I like to imagine my way into the reading. I develop the character's voice and tone in my mind which brings more into the Zelda universe. and i've seen both in this thread and in its system wars counterpart, people saying that they don't even imagine the characters speaking english, as if the text was a translation.Well here is some of Aonuma's own reasoning concerning voice acting in Zelda, which is pretty much exactly what Bruno was talking about:[QUOTE="VGobbsesser"]
There are more ways to immerse a person into a game than to just have the other characters in the game say your name,like, you know, having all of the characters in the game actually speak rather than just reading text. That's a really weak argument against voice acting, to be honest.
JordanElek
2002: "We've obviously carried this on from the previous Zelda games. We can express what we want within the game without having to use a lot of voice acting. While I can't say for certain it will always be like that with Zelda games, the way we've done it for The Wind Waker is suitable for the world. Also, as people have played Zelda over the years, they have formed their own ideas of how Link might sound. If we were to put a voice in there that might not match up with someone's image, then there would be a backlash to that. So we've tried to avoid that."
2005: "When the player is reading text on the screen, they're inserting a part of themselves, their imagination, into the reading. They fill out the world. But with fully spoken dialogue, everything about the character becomes fixed in place, and you lose a bit of that imaginative aspect."
2007: "In regard to voice acting, I made a conscious decision not to give Link a voice because Link is actually the player and to give him a voice would alter the experience for the player so I don't think that that will happen anytime soon. Unless, of course, it benefits the gameplay. It's all about gameplay, so it if benefits the gameplay then we would definitely consider including voice acting. There are many games out there that use voice recording and for me, if I were to choose to include voice acting in a Zelda game, it would have to change the game dramatically and make other people realize that it's a completely new way of using voices."
Not sure if you saw my post before, but it was about designing every aspect of a game around functionality. The current functionality of dialogue in Zelda games is outlined above. In order to add voice acting, Nintendo would need to have a BETTER function for it. As it is, it sounds like they just want to keep things the way they are for fear of upsetting fans over something that might only subtract from the functionality of dialogue rather than add to it or improve it.
Then they need to find a better function for it and make it work. The text-only dialogue is starting to feel dated nowadays, especially since many modern franchises have full voice acting. If they manage to implement the voice acting effectively, then I don't see why they should worry if a few fans hate it at first.
This is exactly what I am getting at. I like to imagine my way into the reading. I develop the character's voice and tone in my mind which brings more into the Zelda universe.wiifan001
So, by that logic, voice acting shouldn't be in any game, because it doesn't bring you into the world?
Sounds good. I hate voice acting, and voice acting in a Zelda game would be absolutely terrible. Very good decision.
[QUOTE="wiifan001"] This is exactly what I am getting at. I like to imagine my way into the reading. I develop the character's voice and tone in my mind which brings more into the Zelda universe.VGobbsesser
So, by that logic, voice acting shouldn't be in any game, because it doesn't bring you into the world?
noooo... just games that are more focused in making the player feel like it's their world, made by their imagination. a game like uncharted or metal gear solid needs voice acting, for example.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment