[TopAce]

This is just another poll. I am curious, because my project won't have voice acting, and I want to know what your opinion is about voice acting.

I picked the second choice.

[Skippy]

Second choice too for me, it really add value to a campaign I think

[Gloriano]

i voted second choice:)

[Ransom]

Voted second too. It adds much more immersion to a campaign, but it's not needed to have a great campaign.

[phreak]

#3.  I can read fast enough so i don't need it.  just as long as the mission designer put in the blank voice files

[Star Dragon]

Second choice...


   The babylon Project spoiled us, now we expect it for all future campaings (so when is the Inferno voice set comming out? )

   It should never be mandatory, but it certainly does enhance the gameplay...

[SnakeEyes]

hmmmmmmmmmm.....

DEFINATELY first choice. There's only one way to have the real feeling of a campaign and voice makes the difference IMO.

[übermetroid]

Voice is very nice, but it is not needed for a good set of missions.

[diamondgeezer]

I can sum up the need for voices in a single soundbyte:

"Remember to leave gaps in the action for messages"

What a ridiculous idea.

[Terorist]

#3. Blank wave files prevent text-to-speech from knowing when to act, so remember that too. (Hmm, maybe RT's builds could be made to detect when a blank wav was played and ignore them?)

Oh, and leave enough time for each message to be read by it, otherwise they all will get cut off all the time when the next one comes!