Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Any CRPG's with good voice acting?

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
If you realize the actress doing Piper was likely told to sound like a cliche 50's reporter from a newsreel then I think she did a pretty good job actually. Most of the cast are pretty blah though.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,576
Location
Nottingham
Fallout 4


Regardless of what they do gameplay-wise, watching that vid really made it apparent just how dead on it's heels FO is with fresh ideas now.

I appriciate there should be mainstays of the game, but Bethesda REALLY needs to freshen things up tonealy to stand any chance of the next FO game being decent. Brotherhood, Enclave, Rangers, Radscorps, Deathclaws, Lurkers etc. - we've now seen & dealt with them many times over, and it gets less interesting each time.

They need to jump shores to somewhere else and freshen it all up, with only 10-15% of what we've seen before re-appearing in the next installment.
 

paintinggrey

Scholar
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
134
Maybe I am speaking out of nostalgia and in reality its pretty mediocre, but I always thought that Baldur's Gate 2 has one of the best voice acting in a game. With excellent acting for Jaheira, Viconia and Irenicus.
 

Citizen

Guest
Maybe I am speaking out of nostalgia and in reality its pretty mediocre, but I always thought that Baldur's Gate 2 has one of the best voice acting in a game. With excellent acting for Jaheira, Viconia and Irenicus.

"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
:badnews:

Edited: or was it in BG1?
 

Sykar

Arcane
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
11,297
Location
Turn right after Alpha Centauri
Maybe I am speaking out of nostalgia and in reality its pretty mediocre, but I always thought that Baldur's Gate 2 has one of the best voice acting in a game. With excellent acting for Jaheira, Viconia and Irenicus.

"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
"Oh, omnipresent authority figure!"
:badnews:

Edited: or was it in BG1?

Anyone with half a brain would have changed response frequency to "selected" instead of "always". Also frequency has nothing to do with quality. Her voice actress did a great job all in all.
 

kintake

Savant
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
239
Location
Norway
Unless they can scream like that guy who did the english voice for Goku they're not worthy of a pinch of my salt.
 

Neanderthal

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
3,626
Location
Granbretan
Arcanum's Torian Kel has some pretty good voice acting I thought, along with quite a few others. His description of the battle between the Derian Ka and Molochean Hand is bloody atmospheric.
 

Mark Richard

Arcane
Joined
Mar 14, 2016
Messages
1,192
Regardless of what they do gameplay-wise, watching that vid really made it apparent just how dead on it's heels FO is with fresh ideas now.

I appriciate there should be mainstays of the game, but Bethesda REALLY needs to freshen things up tonealy to stand any chance of the next FO game being decent. Brotherhood, Enclave, Rangers, Radscorps, Deathclaws, Lurkers etc. - we've now seen & dealt with them many times over, and it gets less interesting each time.

They need to jump shores to somewhere else and freshen it all up, with only 10-15% of what we've seen before re-appearing in the next installment.
Seeing factions evolve was always one of my favourite aspects of this franchise. It used to be so believable.

Fallout 2 - Some super Mutants attempt to integrate with the populace as best they can, holding to the belief that the master's vision was still right. The Brotherhood are losing relevance, their hardline isolationist stance condemning them to a slow death. Born from a rescuee of the player from the previous game, the NCR has spread across California and became the dominant power.

Fallout: New Vegas - The NCR has become bloated and riddled with corruption, encountering an equally powerful enemy with very different ideals to their own called Caesar's Legion. Caesar believes the NCR is a remnant of the old world that will cause history to repeat itself. The Brotherhood have doubled down and have become less relevant than ever, like a gnat watching two elephants fight.

Bethesda don't really have anything solid to build off of from Fallout 3. The Brotherhood of Steel are suddenly virtuous knights maintaining order in the Wasteland. The Enclave has become a bond villain, somehow finding the manpower to establish themselves as a major force after their total defeat in Fallout 2 despite being even more isolationist than The Brotherhood. These factions should be dead, but they're the main heroes and antagonists of the game simply because they're the most recognisable and marketable of the Fallout universe. Bethesda's efforts read like fan fiction, and the saddest part is that's what most fans want.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,576
Location
Nottingham
Regardless of what they do gameplay-wise, watching that vid really made it apparent just how dead on it's heels FO is with fresh ideas now.

I appriciate there should be mainstays of the game, but Bethesda REALLY needs to freshen things up tonealy to stand any chance of the next FO game being decent. Brotherhood, Enclave, Rangers, Radscorps, Deathclaws, Lurkers etc. - we've now seen & dealt with them many times over, and it gets less interesting each time.

They need to jump shores to somewhere else and freshen it all up, with only 10-15% of what we've seen before re-appearing in the next installment.
Seeing factions evolve was always one of my favourite aspects of this franchise. It used to be so believable.

Fallout 2 - Some super Mutants attempt to integrate with the populace as best they can, holding to the belief that the master's vision was still right. The Brotherhood are losing relevance, their hardline isolationist stance condemning them to a slow death. Born from a rescuee of the player from the previous game, the NCR has spread across California and became the dominant power.

Fallout: New Vegas - The NCR has become bloated and riddled with corruption, encountering an equally powerful enemy with very different ideals to their own called Caesar's Legion. Caesar believes the NCR is a remnant of the old world that will cause history to repeat itself. The Brotherhood have doubled down and have become less relevant than ever, like a gnat watching two elephants fight.

Bethesda don't really have anything solid to build off of from Fallout 3. The Brotherhood of Steel are suddenly virtuous knights maintaining order in the Wasteland. The Enclave has become a bond villain, somehow finding the manpower to establish themselves as a major force after their total defeat in Fallout 2 despite being even more isolationist than The Brotherhood. These factions should be dead, but they're the main heroes and antagonists of the game simply because they're the most recognisable and marketable of the Fallout universe. Bethesda's efforts read like fan fiction, and the saddest part is that's what most fans want.

Spot on.

Fallout 4 was just like some bizare tribute to the lot of them. Loads of elements present, but all of them felt flat, soulless & pointless.

Time for a change for sure. Defo be good to see some elements tucked away for those who explore thoroughly, but it's just all so predictable now.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Bethesda don't really have anything solid to build off of from Fallout 3. The Brotherhood of Steel are suddenly virtuous knights maintaining order in the Wasteland. The Enclave has become a bond villain, somehow finding the manpower to establish themselves as a major force after their total defeat in Fallout 2 despite being even more isolationist than The Brotherhood. These factions should be dead, but they're the main heroes and antagonists of the game simply because they're the most recognisable and marketable of the Fallout universe. Bethesda's efforts read like fan fiction, and the saddest part is that's what most fans want.

I give them some credit for turning the Brotherhood into total fascists in Fallout 4. They could have kept going with the virtuous knights thing to be mass-market friendly, but they went a completely different direction. The Railroad is considered a bunch of weirdo losers by a lot of persuasive NPCs too, which I was happy to see as I've personally never liked the "advanced robots as allegory for human rights" trope in science-fiction. The Minutemen were the boring knights, and honestly I never saw much of them since I hated the town building mechanic and ignored their quests.

I think Fallout just needs a break, which is why 76 being an MMO thing doesn't bother me. After Starfield and TES6 Bethesda can come back with something more fresh, hopefully. Maybe hire some of Obsidian's fleeing staff. :lol:
 

Lurker47

Savant
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
721
Location
Texas
Regardless of what they do gameplay-wise, watching that vid really made it apparent just how dead on it's heels FO is with fresh ideas now.

I appriciate there should be mainstays of the game, but Bethesda REALLY needs to freshen things up tonealy to stand any chance of the next FO game being decent. Brotherhood, Enclave, Rangers, Radscorps, Deathclaws, Lurkers etc. - we've now seen & dealt with them many times over, and it gets less interesting each time.

They need to jump shores to somewhere else and freshen it all up, with only 10-15% of what we've seen before re-appearing in the next installment.
Seeing factions evolve was always one of my favourite aspects of this franchise. It used to be so believable.

Fallout 2 - Some super Mutants attempt to integrate with the populace as best they can, holding to the belief that the master's vision was still right. The Brotherhood are losing relevance, their hardline isolationist stance condemning them to a slow death. Born from a rescuee of the player from the previous game, the NCR has spread across California and became the dominant power.

Fallout: New Vegas - The NCR has become bloated and riddled with corruption, encountering an equally powerful enemy with very different ideals to their own called Caesar's Legion. Caesar believes the NCR is a remnant of the old world that will cause history to repeat itself. The Brotherhood have doubled down and have become less relevant than ever, like a gnat watching two elephants fight.

Bethesda don't really have anything solid to build off of from Fallout 3. The Brotherhood of Steel are suddenly virtuous knights maintaining order in the Wasteland. The Enclave has become a bond villain, somehow finding the manpower to establish themselves as a major force after their total defeat in Fallout 2 despite being even more isolationist than The Brotherhood. These factions should be dead, but they're the main heroes and antagonists of the game simply because they're the most recognisable and marketable of the Fallout universe. Bethesda's efforts read like fan fiction, and the saddest part is that's what most fans want.
One of the things I find most interesting about this is how "un-Falllout" virtually any foreseeable sequel to the west coast/California/Nevada story would be (which is why Avellone suggested somewhere isolated from the rest of these incidents like the Boneyard or New Orleans or whatever). A lot of the "Fallout" feel is hard to describe tangibly so hear me out.

Like, imagine if the BoS canonically made reforms after being fucked over in the Mojave and somehow regained some of its status. Wouldn't that just feel kind of weird? I mean, it's tangible but it doesn't really fit the sort of arc they went through. And that's how I realized that the sort of pseudo-trilogy that 1, 2, and New Vegas plays into treats its towns and factions less as actual things and more purely as vessels for the main themes of societal decay, the unchanging nature of war, etc, etc. Granted, that seems kind of obvious (wow, the stories are thematically consistent) but it really limits the lifespan of virtually any faction in the game. Putting the NCR in an even worse light would just be redundant and having them rise above their problems is counter-productive.

I think the real divide between Avellone and Sawyer isn't "muh wasteland" vs. "muh society", it's more of Avellone viewing the factions as their story arcs as opposed to Sawyer viewing them as actual political and social entities. Sawyer's approach could create some interesting plots and developments but ultimately, it wouldn't feel very "Fallout".
 

Mark Richard

Arcane
Joined
Mar 14, 2016
Messages
1,192
One of the things I find most interesting about this is how "un-Falllout" virtually any foreseeable sequel to the west coast/California/Nevada story would be (which is why Avellone suggested somewhere isolated from the rest of these incidents like the Boneyard or New Orleans or whatever). A lot of the "Fallout" feel is hard to describe tangibly so hear me out.

Like, imagine if the BoS canonically made reforms after being fucked over in the Mojave and somehow regained some of its status. Wouldn't that just feel kind of weird? I mean, it's tangible but it doesn't really fit the sort of arc they went through. And that's how I realized that the sort of pseudo-trilogy that 1, 2, and New Vegas plays into treats its towns and factions less as actual things and more purely as vessels for the main themes of societal decay, the unchanging nature of war, etc, etc. Granted, that seems kind of obvious (wow, the stories are thematically consistent) but it really limits the lifespan of virtually any faction in the game. Putting the NCR in an even worse light would just be redundant and having them rise above their problems is counter-productive.

I think the real divide between Avellone and Sawyer isn't "muh wasteland" vs. "muh society", it's more of Avellone viewing the factions as their story arcs as opposed to Sawyer viewing them as actual political and social entities. Sawyer's approach could create some interesting plots and developments but ultimately, it wouldn't feel very "Fallout".
Yeah, that's a big part of what Fallout is to me. Many of the ethoses forged in this post-apocalyptic environment have a shelf life. It's very clear the Brotherhood's destiny is to fade into legend and serve as a cautionary tale, having committed to their course for over a hundred years according to FO 1, 2, and Vegas. Even though realistically a people would probably adapt rather than die, throwing them a lifeline now feels as jarring as say... Warhammer fantasy elves and dwarves (races that have been dying for millennia) suddenly getting their act together.
 

Lurker47

Savant
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
721
Location
Texas
One of the things I find most interesting about this is how "un-Falllout" virtually any foreseeable sequel to the west coast/California/Nevada story would be (which is why Avellone suggested somewhere isolated from the rest of these incidents like the Boneyard or New Orleans or whatever). A lot of the "Fallout" feel is hard to describe tangibly so hear me out.

Like, imagine if the BoS canonically made reforms after being fucked over in the Mojave and somehow regained some of its status. Wouldn't that just feel kind of weird? I mean, it's tangible but it doesn't really fit the sort of arc they went through. And that's how I realized that the sort of pseudo-trilogy that 1, 2, and New Vegas plays into treats its towns and factions less as actual things and more purely as vessels for the main themes of societal decay, the unchanging nature of war, etc, etc. Granted, that seems kind of obvious (wow, the stories are thematically consistent) but it really limits the lifespan of virtually any faction in the game. Putting the NCR in an even worse light would just be redundant and having them rise above their problems is counter-productive.

I think the real divide between Avellone and Sawyer isn't "muh wasteland" vs. "muh society", it's more of Avellone viewing the factions as their story arcs as opposed to Sawyer viewing them as actual political and social entities. Sawyer's approach could create some interesting plots and developments but ultimately, it wouldn't feel very "Fallout".
Yeah, that's a big part of what Fallout is to me. Many of the ethoses forged in this post-apocalyptic environment have a shelf life. It's very clear the Brotherhood's destiny is to fade into legend and serve as a cautionary tale, having committed to their course for over a hundred years according to FO 1, 2, and Vegas. Even though realistically a people would probably adapt rather than die, throwing them a lifeline now feels as jarring as say... Warhammer fantasy elves and dwarves (races that have been dying for millennia) suddenly getting their act together.
This kind of thing makes me realize how autistic Sawyer can be and how he doesn't really seem to grasp the appeal of much of anything that's he involved in.
 

PorkBarrellGuy

Guest
I liked Diablo 2's voice acting for the most part. Icewind Dale had some amazing voice acting at times (Arundel, Hrothgar, narrator are all great. Larrel wasn't bad either IIRC). New Vegas is pretty solid for VA work, I liked Raul, Boone's VA did a good job for his character, Veronica and Cass were both fine (though god damn Cass is mouthy). House was pretty close to perfect for the character. A lot of the minor/major-minor characters sounded pretty close to perfect for what they were (Lt. Carrie Boyd, Gloria Van Graff and Johnson Nash come to mind)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

typical user

Arbiter
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
957
Does it need to be fully voiced?

If not then Fallout will be a great choice. People have pointed out New Vegas, but sometimes you get scientists speaking fare-wells like raiders, others like they are just paperwork on holiday and Legion who sounds too civilized to be considered a union of tribes that lives of slavery.

Can't say a word about Gothic 1&2 - those also have some strange situations like Bromor the Khorinis brothel owner, or nameless one sounding like someone in his twenties while sporting a looks for a mid thirties.

Don't know if Witcher has english voice-over - but it should qualify as CRPG by Codex standards, you can even go as far as with its' sequel.

Or play it safe with Bloodlines - if someone sounds goofy then it's because of that person's personality / design. The animations don't help but if you look the other way then there is high quality voice acting that helps you immerse in the world even better.
 

mfkndggrfll

Learned
Shitposter Bethestard
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
546
The best RPGs dont have any voice acting. The narrator voice in your head and good writing is all you need.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom