[/quote]
Crni Vuk said:
Hmm ?
Even if you do 300 000 NPCs. You can still do generic voices that still sound "good". Drakensang river of time has really good voices for most of its NPCs (at least the German version). If this company which has NOT the size of Bethesda can do it. Why cant they ?
Because they know no shame and have no work-ethic.
Yes, the voice acting of drakensang is way beyond FO3 although I always have to think of spongebob when I hear it
.
Crni Vuk said:
Also even if the generic NPCs sound like stupid retarded idiots. No reason why you cant give better voices to the important NPCs. Really neither your "dad" or this Elder or his doughter had very great voices in Fallout 3. But that might be also cause the dialogues are so piss poor written that it is probably really terrible for any voice actor to give life to that. I really cant imagine how anyone even with skill should give those characters life considering some of the dialogues they have ...
"you cant do all this, where will it end?"
"youre right. I kill my self. Go out. ... base destroyed in 5 min crap bla bla".
awesome how deep it is ...
Money. They are paid by the hour. So you invite them to the studio, hand them the script and make one recording. No getting in character, no rehearsing, no retrys to get it right. Here’s your cash (only full hours count), goodbye, boy did you see, that was Ron Pearlman!!!
Crni Vuk said:
Thing is that Bethesda does not only NOT get any criticism for that. Hell no! Many of them see their writting and such even as the best ever seen around! No surprise that some think they have also the best voice acting ... what I dont understand is how games from EA, or other big companies get criticised sometimes for it if they have bad voice acting but not Bethesda ...
There was a lot of stuff written here at NMA about the Gamecritics that evaluated FO3. Remember the endless list of 10/10 reviews that Per posted here? The reason why the “Gamejournos” gave those absolutely ridiculous scores may vary. Some are just retards that don’t know any better, some were jumping up and down on the bandwagon, others simply could not write how they felt about the game cause their boss told them not to (exclusives, ad space, nice trips to hotels with cool hookers and, since this is Bethesda, probably the fear of a lawsuit). But if you score FO3 11/10 and hail it as the second coming, ignoring the stupid writing, the boring, static world, the bad animations, the watering down of SPECIAL and any RPG-mechanics to the point where nothing original is left….what is the point, at this juncture, to criticize the voice acting? It’s just another failing in a monumental series of pure and unadorned fail. If the “pros” did not point out the other flaws, why should they do it now? With other games-reviews the critics are probably more objective and flaws are recognized and pointed out as such.
Bethesda really has the knack of hyping a game to the point that the game-reviewers actually believe the advertising and give the game the score they and beth believe it ought to have, not what it actually deserves. Two years later there is always a bit of embarrassed shuffling of feet and off they are to rate the next hype.
The gaming-press sure isn’t what it used to be, but the only game I can think of that was treated the way they did Oblivion and FO3 was Gothic 3. And the press got a lot of flak about the way they handled that one. I just think that other companies, regardless of size, don’t put the same kind of pressure on the journos as beth does. But other developers aren’t as dependant on good reviews as beth because they often have at least one or two areas where their games are actually good.
I’m as baffled as you are that beth gets away with it every time, but they don’t get away with bad VA, they get away with bad everything. Criticizing VA in a beth-game is like tugging at a loose seam: suddenly everything unravels and there would be nothing left. Better leave things lie.
