• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Stellaris Dev Diary #77 - Ethics Voice Packs

Hello everyone and welcome to another Stellaris development diary. This week’s diary I’m taking charge and going to write about Voice Over’s for the (unannounced) Story Pack coming alongside the 1.8 ‘Čapek’ update! We still can’t tell you any further details about the name or release date of the Story Pack, but stay tuned for future dev diaries!

For the upcoming Story Pack we felt that we wanted to experiment with VIR, our friendly advisor, see how it would feel to have different set of VO cues depending on your Empire’s ethic. A VO Cue is a term that we use to describe a Voice Over line that triggers at a certain point in the game as for example “Hostile Fleet Detected” or “Research Complete”.

We started with a test case in-house to try it out and we concluded that it was a great experience! From then on we moved on with the process and allocated time to write unique script for each role, character description, casting, auditions and finally recording sessions. It has been personally a long and hard process but in the end I’m really pleased to finally show of 3 samples out of 10 Voice Packs!


There will be a automatic settings for the VO Packs in the game so that the VO will switch depending on what Ethic you start with in the game and also switches while you're playing if you decided with switch Ethic's in your campaign. If you're not into that you will be able to select with set of VO Cues you want to play and you will always be able to switch back to the original VO if you desire.

Now that you have heard some of the results you might ask yourself how the whole procedure works with recording VO? So I’ll describe to a certain detail how the whole process goes by. :)

First of you need to write a script and if you have talented Content Designers. and we do have in our team, there is no problem to get good a script. Once the script is complete and approved it gets handed to me and I take it to the next step: Casting!

Casting of it’s own is also a long process which takes time. With help of a Casting Director you can get in touch with several possible Voice Actors that can help you to deliver the best result out of each script. When you have picked out potential actors that you think will suit for the role, you bring them in for a audition. In an audition you let the actor read a certain part of the script which usually depict the character the most and also give the best material for the Voice Actor so that they can perform as good as possible. After all the auditions are done you pick the actor that suited the best for the role. Sometimes during auditions actors comes for a certain role to read but during the session you realize that the actor would be more fitted for another role and that happened to our Militarist! We brought her in to do a audition for another role first but while she was reading the part for the first role I heard that she might be better suited as a angry general, so I asked her to try out for the Militarist and it was a really good fit! So good that we ended up with her as the Militarist.

With all the casting/auditions done you move on to the actual recording session, get as much possible material from your actors. It is important that you’re there to act as a “director” for the actors so that you can give the instructions and guidelines so that they can give you all the right emotions and takes that you require for your character in the game.

As soon as the recordings were done I moved on to editing. There is a lot of editing when it comes to VO since it is not only about how the recording equipment sound but also the sheer amount of assets you need to go through..

VY1grVq.png


While editing you usually “zoom in” really close in the waveforms of the recordings to mess around/cutting noise such as clicks and pops. So yes, we Sound Designers tend to get really nerdy when it comes to VO editing:

aHHJbEZ.png


After you have done all the editing which is removing “clicks” and “pops”, ugly breath takes, add fade in/out, you move into adding “effects” to the VO so we can get that cool Robotic style. For each VO I gave them something else than just using the same settings as for “Default VIR”.

So in short terms that is how you record VO!

That's all for today! Next week we'll be talking about robots and robotic modification.
 
It doesn't matter where it's from or if it's a reference, it just doesn't work with the ethic.

But that has nothing to do with the voice acting. It's just badly directed.
The voice actor simply does what she was told to do, and does it well.
The people telling here what to do were wrong, in that they picked the wrong thing to convey a militaristic tone.
 
I think that the Militarist voice, with that specific quote, would fit perfectly for a rally. It's not something you use as orders, but instead for speeches.
It's for a soliloquy; publicly calling for everything to fall into chaos and a war of all against all isn't likely to go down well, regardless of what the Gotham TV show tells you. That's a line from someone who saw his country was lead by murderers and scoundrels and wanted the gods to exact vengeance through a bloody cleansing.

Which is why 99% of its usage is cliche, as 99% of the time it's reduced to meaning "I like war." Like here.
 
The militarist one basically fits a relative primitive Warrior culture. A soldier one or a militaristic disciplined Empire, not in the slightest. Think about anything from Starship Troopers to Galatic Empire using it.

The quote is from Theater, from before microphones too, so it has to be over the top and crazy, otherwise people in the back wouldn't be able to read the emotions.
Which is exactly my problem with it. It's extremely primitive in a lot of way. More along the lines of fur clad warriors clashing in personal hand to hand combat. It has zero to do sophisticated militaristic empire build upon discipline and order.
 
The militarist one basically fits a relative primitive Warrior culture. A soldier one or a militaristic disciplined Empire, not in the slightest. Think about anything from Starship Troopers to Galatic Empire using it.


Which is exactly my problem with it. It's extremely primitive in a lot of way. More along the lines of fur clad warriors clashing in personal hand to hand combat. It has zero to do sophisticated militaristic empire build upon discipline and order.

I have to fully agree, I think you hit the spot there with it feeling primitive, not becoming of a star empire.
 
Now you make me want to hear the Spiritualist voice :p
That's the problem isn't it? Spiritualist can range anything from the pacifist to fanatic purifier... and just in my recent game I played both xenophobic spiritualist celestial empire and fanatic spiritualist Imperial cult
I guess the issue is inherent to the fact that the voices are categorised along the ethics lines. It makes sense, ethics are one of the central aspect of Stellaris gameplay, but that means, and people have to accept it, that not every possible fantasy is going to be represented. The studio probably doesn't have infinite budget for a story pack sized DLC so it's impressive enough that they want to do 9 of them. Usually announcers in games, if there's a choice of them, are based on iconic characters rather than wide stereotypes such as "ethics"... but Stellaris doesn't have iconic characters to draw upon, there's no Abathur, Kerrigan, Nova or Alarak who can sell their voice packs on name alone (as in, well established personalities and speech patterns that don't necessarily represent anyone other than themselves).

I'm going to wait for the rest of the voices to be revealed before I decide if I like any of them. The ones I'm looking forward to the most are xenophile and materialist because those are my "main" ethics. If I don't like any of the new voices, it won't really affect me, I'll probably continue to use the Yuzuki Yukari mod. But even now I'm in love with the Borgy voice so I think that even if I don't find a favourite, there will still be enough distinctiveness to allow for situational choices.
 
Last edited:
It's for a soliloquy; publicly calling for everything to fall into chaos and a war of all against all isn't likely to go down well, regardless of what the Gotham TV show tells you. That's a line from someone who saw his country was lead by murderers and scoundrels and wanted the gods to exact vengeance through a bloody cleansing.

Which is why 99% of its usage is cliche, as 99% of the time it's reduced to meaning "I like war." Like here.

Not as glorious as the Japanese version though
 
But that has nothing to do with the voice acting. It's just badly directed.
The voice actor simply does what she was told to do, and does it well.
The people telling here what to do were wrong, in that they picked the wrong thing to convey a militaristic tone.
Well, it kinda sounds like it's gargling gravel. The VA is clearly overacting imo in addition to the bad direction.
 
Last edited:

Not as glorious as the Japanese version though
"A SWASTIKA!! SDJIFHISDH FJKWDBFJKSDBF KSDBF JKSDB FJKBS SWEDISH LAW PROHIBITS EVIL NAZI SYMBOLS BAN BLOCK DOX FOREVER *OTHER FORMS OF LOUD SCREECHING*"
-My prediction of what someone will say in about 10 minutes.
 
Maybe if the video was 30 seconds longer, with the audio director briefly commenting on what the idea was behind the voice style ''the vision'' so to say.

I then compared the now much debated militarist voice to well speeches of some militarist dictator and the over the top figures of speech like a shakespear quote could definitely work for public rallies, but I never saw the people delivering the speeches give a certain growling undertone that the voice actor used. So the line I think really grasps the militarism as a culture really well, but the voice might not be that of a human militarist leader (even smaller chance of being a human AI helper I guess) but for an alien it could work perfectly imo. Also we only saw one line, perhaps this is the line when the advisor really goes all out, when declaring war on a hated rival or such so I'll reserve any opinions for later.

Now if there is any bias in this community (and I'm taking a lighter tone here), it is a strategy gamer bias :p
We as people enjoying (grand) strategy games see ourselves as making order, our pawns in the game listen with supreme discipline as we expect them to. So there is only a slim chance that we see our militaristic empire that is somehow conquering the stars as a race of hotblooded warriors who nearly annihilated themselves in nuclear war and are only kept in check because of a promise of conquest and war (40k orcs would be the extreme). No, a strategy gamer's militarist society would be founded on prussian discipline, tight ranks, ceremony, and parades. With militarist we automatically think a bit of what in human history has been seen as militarism, usually reserved for authoritarian dictators or monarchs.

Is authoritarianism needed to belief in a mentality that war is the continuation of politics, or believing that the right of the strongest is a valid ethical standpoint? A military society could be anything from a loose warrior culture, to a democracy obsessed with guns and duty, to religious zealots or a fascist dictatorship. The world of stellaris is broad and it might need 30 voices to account for every possibility :D
 
I have to fully agree, I think you hit the spot there with it feeling primitive, not becoming of a star empire.
Thing is, it would be fine for something similar to the "Klingons" which is a warrior culture. It however does not fit for any "Soldier" one. It's an enitre trope on it's own http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SoldierVsWarrior given the response most here seem to have seen and played Militarists more as the Soldier types. While those who are okay it squarely fall into the Warrior one.

Neither side is inherently wrong, the voice just doesn't cover both and seems to have missed the mayority group (me included).
 
Thing is, it would be fine for something similar to the "Klingons" which is a warrior culture. It however does not fit for any "Soldier" one. It's an enitre trope on it's own http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SoldierVsWarrior given the response most here seem to have seen and played Militarists more as the Soldier types. While those who are okay it squarely fall into the Warrior one.

Neither side is inherently wrong, the voice just doesn't cover both and seems to have missed the mayority group (me included).

The thing is, though, several of the other voices are almost certainly going to do the crisp, clean, efficient style so having the militarist do the same thing risks having all of them seem bland by comparison. Better to make the voice something easily identified with militarist, but still unique, than to have it become generic soldier #1739.
 
Problem with that is that it misses the emotions that the voices have tied into it.

And the emotions and tone make a major difference. The way they said it made it come across one way, but saying it tiredly would have it come across completely differently.

"I can't wait to start killing" vs "Why won't this war just end already."

You have a point. But I still think you can't order a shakespearian total rape in a disciplined manner.
 
Right now, I'm so hoping the materialist VO is a cool, calculated female voice, akin to Aki-Zeta Five of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri / Alien Crossfire. That way, we'd have the female equivalent to the xenophobe one, and multiple choices for militarist societies. I'd happily use that militarist VO for a rampaging spiritualist empire, something which I suspect the default spiritualist empire might not be styled around.

Mind, three lines from three ethics out of nine is a very small sample. I'm sure the full package will give a breath of voices with something for all preferences - depending of course on how closely the spoken lines are tied to their original ethos, rather than to a chosen 'feel' of the ethos. I'm more worried about the script than the voice acting.

My gripe with the sample is actually the use of Shakespeare. Not that long ago, a certain story pack was carefully written to avoid using "species words" such as 'hands' vs 'appendages' - and here we have a line so completely tied to planet Earth and its history. In most of my games, Earth has been a radioactive husk populated by roaches, and I don't think they kept the written records of humanity. :p

Side note - I've also always wondered - a hive mind is technically a single mind. Why is it that every time such an entity is given a voice, it uses plural pronouns about itself? Are all hive minds Victorian royals, never amused?
 
Right now, I'm so hoping the materialist VO...
Given that Stellaris seems to treat materialism as the stereotypical unfriendly atheist (evident by when materialist empires, fallen or no, don't like you) I imagine the voice will be deadpan and disinterested... OR it will be the greatest VO ever voiced by Adam Jensen or JC Denton.

*Synthetic ascension perk chosen* "I never asked for this."
*Psionic ascension perk chosen* "What a shame."
 
Side note - I've also always wondered - a hive mind is technically a single mind. Why is it that every time such an entity is given a voice, it uses plural pronouns about itself? Are all hive minds Victorian royals, never amused?

It depends. A hive mind can be a single consciousness controlling many drones or many minds collectively determining their path together.
 
Of the 3 shown, I personally prefer the hive mind. In regards to the talk on the militarist, my personal preference would be for a more bloodthirsty approach, I like it hammed up a bit.
 
Side note - I've also always wondered - a hive mind is technically a single mind. Why is it that every time such an entity is given a voice, it uses plural pronouns about itself? Are all hive minds Victorian royals, never amused?
It depends. A hive mind can be a single consciousness controlling many drones or many minds collectively determining their path together.

It's also likely a translation thing.
The English language doesn't have a pronoun for many bodies, one mind.
 
It's also likely a translation thing.
The English language doesn't have a pronoun for many bodies, one mind.
I was going to make a Tumblr joke, but given the current environment of this thread, that would be a very bad idea.
 
I mean, I guess if everyone wants to interpret that as him calling them sexists individually, no one can stop them. I certainly didn't take it as an insult to myself, but then I'm just one person, not a demographic.

Or is the community on this forum really so full of themselves that they think that as a whole and individually on a collective level, we are all of us flawless, perfect, and beyond reproach in any manner? That any criticism to the collective environment that this forum is a subset of is a direct attack on the individual that dares call themselves a member of it in any capacity?

That doesn't even make any sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.