You stipulated FPP and voiced protagonist; and claimed that they didn't exist in the 90's.

There are plenty that existed without FPP.

There is a reason for that. Locking your development into a fully scripted [voiced] narrative, makes changing that narrative difficult. It also means that the PC's voice is fixed, and in RPGs that allow a wide variance, that poses a glaring problem. RPGs generally don't need a voiced PC, as everything the PC says passes through the player's awareness before they select it as their choice.

This is the idea; and how it's supposed to be... It is the point and purpose of it.

People can play any game however they want, but that doesn't mean that the game should actively facilitate or encourage playing it in any way other than as intended.

I'd prefer no protagonist voice, but I'd rather have only one option than have the download size massively increased due to the voice files associated with a half dozen more flavors of the same 13,000 voiced lines just to provide variety.

To this point, you are correct in how you play, but I almost always play as if it is me in the game. I imagine many others do as well. Regardless of if we assign our character a role, or the role is assigned to us, I would argue that every role is influenced by the player themselves whether they choose to acknowledge it or not. To this end I can understand why people are upset about a voice protagonist, and I am not. The default protagonist presented at E3 is very similar to me so I do not have any issue, but I can understand the OP's and others issue with it, even if I do not agree.

No idea what FPP is, and can't be bothered trying to guess. Also, I think you misinterpreted what I said. To say there are or were games without Voiced Protagonists either now or 15 years ago does not imply that I'm making a blanket statement that applies to ALL games. Again, rules versus exceptions.

Explaining how and why RPGs work without Voiced Protagonists in response to my post means what exactly? What point were you trying to make? Yes, what you said was right, but again, I don't see how what you said is relevant as a counterpoint to anything I said.

And it appears other people like LostPony are arguing my last point as well. Point being, ROLEPLAYING means that people like to put themselves in that role, either pretending to be someone else or playing themselves in that fiction.

Ah, of course.

I made the mistake of thinking this was a different conversation about whether the racial characteristics of the PC should be reflected in their voice. Which would of course have the prerequisite of the player having a voice.

But if it's actually about whether the protagonist should be voiced at all, then I really can't be bothered going through that again.

Why must I pick lots of choice or no voice at all? I can pick one voice per six if I like. And I can do it based on practical considerations. What's more, it's going to be be one voice per six, so I win. Bad luck.

Great, you've been accommodated for.

Screw everyone else! Fantastic argument! \o/

How anyone plays (or wants to play) does not matter ~in the least bit. How the game is designed does; what it facilitates does.

There were Oblivion players who decided that their PCs were guards, and in addition to wearing the guard outfit, they did shifts posted at city gates... But that doesn't mean that the game should actually support that.

Also: RPGs (if they are RPGs) support designing a character ~not a costume. Those characters are the ones present, and are [ideally] limited by their personal strengths and weaknesses... not the player's. The entire point is for the player to be afforded the chance to play someone else ~not themselves in costume; not themselves as a spell caster, or a warrior. What is the point of giving a PC a name then? Why should they have attributes? In any decent RPG, why should they have skills (as they do). These are their limits and abilities. They define the character. They do not define the player.

In an RPG, if the PC is incapable of accessing an area (on the map or in conversation), then the player is not entitled to that content ~until they play a PC that can enable access. This is why PC's have stats, why RPGs have Charisma ~for instance. It's indicative of the PC's personality and ability to win people over... That's not affected by the player's own. Indeed the very point can be for a player ~who isn't charismatic to experience the life of someone who is; and for a player who knows nothing of the Martial Arts, to be able to play a master of them.

Of course it's right, but why would you take it as a counterpoint?

Actually I don't much care. But I object to being told what I'm allowed to think by complete strangers. Especially about something as inconsequential as a computer game.

A couple of things. Who you are and how you are as a person in not akin to saying "I'm a Wizard!". Your ethnicity, who you really are as person is no great stretch to the imagination and I 100% guarantee that there will be NPCs of all ethnicities in Fallout 4 who look and sound like a quintessential stereotype. Now, that's not necessarily a bad thing, and NPCs have that coverage, but somehow wanting to have an accurate portrayal of yourself in a video game that allows the player to create their character the way they want, from a studio which prides itself on that choice and makes games that condone such choice; to then deny said choice in voice alone is contrary to everything people have come to expect from Bethesda and their games.

RPGs have and will always try to support players creating a character of their choice, but now, because we're introducing voices, all of a sudden player choice is "logically" no longer important? As if it's a factual statement. That's a bad move for Bethesda.

Secondly, you quoted something I said and explained that RPG thing after it. If it wasn't meant as a counterpoint, why quote me beforehand? Unless you're narrating to a wider audience and trying to elaborate on things for their benefit?

Edit : @You Maniacs! : Then you're on the wrong Forums to not care about "computer games". For some people it's a hobby, for others it's their job. Either way, "I don't care" is not a valid retort.

I'm always guilty of that.

(But that doesn't mean that quoting as person is hostile; that doean't mean that the other person cannot agree and disagree with separate points in a post; or partially with some.)

As I read it, you made a statement, and I said that there was a reason for that... and described it.

** I've been looking over the thread, and I think that it was not you that 'stipulated FPP and voiced' examples, I think that was a different poster. ~FPP means "First Person Perspective".

*** Found it: http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1527920-my-biggest-concern-with-voiced-protagonist-is/?p=24179882

It was my mistake.

OK, sorry Ephidel. I was being needlessly argumentative. Lets wind back on that one:

You seem to be saying I have to choose between wanting no voice and lots of voices, but the only option available is to have one voice for each six.

This argument makes little sense to me.

Better?

and that is not correct, very few games give you MULTIPLE, FULLY VOICED, Choices. Saints row (about 4 each), Dragon age: inquisition (2 each), and Swtor (depending on class) are pretty much it. all of them have been made by companies with WAY, WAY more money then Bethesda has.

I will say it again, BETHESDA CANNOT DO IT, They DO NOT have the money. even if they did it would be WAY, WAY too late.

And again, you are wrong, MANY RPGs, have protags with only one voice.

You do NOT get to say what it or is not, you do NOT speak for everybody nor does Bethesda care what people like you have to say.

You have to DEAL WITH IT.

Just for clarification, are you intentionally trolling your own thread now? Looking at the 6th page and you're essentially listing video content that contradicts your original assertions.

That's not true entirely. RPGs have always tried to facilitate giving players choices of going about completing a certain objective. They have not always tried to support creating a character of our choice at the creation process. Our character, in most RPGs at least, is molded by their actions in the world and that is what comes to define them.

The introduction of a voiced protag only removes one aspect of character creation, it does not hinder player choice entirely. To deduce that a voiced protag suddenly means that player choice is logically unimportant, is asinine.

No, it doesnt. It confirms my position that races have unique voices.

90% of the RPG video game genre tends to disagree with that assumption

Saints Row had 3 male and 3 female usually I think, 1 'white', 1 gangsta and 1 hispanic (spanish speaking).... a lot less voice acting compared to Fallout 4 I'd expect though.

Personally I'd rather have one voice actor with a lot of dialogue, rather than 3 'racial' accents with less dialogue.

Can anybody give an example of a generic white, black, hispanic or asian voice that doesn't sound stereotypically racist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmhFfcyFBLU

I'm actually still somewhat surprised that Beth went with a voiced PC. After all, their mantra is to keep the games easy to mod by the community, even releasing the creation kit, but it's going to be damned difficult to mod in quests without having access to PC voicebox. Makes me wonder if they included the voice recordings in the creation kit, or if it has an option to record your own...

And what does that have to do with anything? Unless the guy holding the camera was asian its totally irrelevant.

Nah, the store owner's accent, voice, and inflection. It has everything to do with what is being discussed.

yeah it wasnt that clear cut but you still get those "evolutionary outbursts/ticks" or whatever which reveal the asian/black character.

I would also rather have one (male, one female) with more dialogue. I do not prefer racial accents with less dialogue. Actually I prefer a silent protagonist but if I had to choose, I would go with more dialogue.

I really don't think voices sound racist. They just sound different. I really appreciate all accents (please forgive if I am using the incorrect term) ~ Asian, Spanish, French, German, British, etc. People from different areas of the world all sound amazing to me. Nothing racist about it.

And in the case of the protag in Fo4, he's one of those exceptions to the rule.

By stereotypically racist I mean the attempt to come up with a generic racial voice, even if we limit the voices to North Americans what does a generic white mans voice sound like, what does a generic black mans voice sound like, etc........hearing people speak is more about their regional accent (never mind if English isn't there native tongue) than their skin colour, attempting to come up with a generic voice for a racial group is just asking for trouble.

Even Saints Row doesn't say what their voices represent, its just voice 1, voice 2 and voice 3........I as a British man was offended by voice number ones terrible 'British' accent.

I'm so excited that 200 posts have been reached....