Narrator voice

[CaptainD]

Just getting opinion as it will influence what we decide to do on a project at the moment...

If in a game the characters' speech is all voiced, do you generally prefer EVERYTHING to be voices - object interactions, looking at objects etc?

The two main ways of doing this are having a narrator (a la King's Quest) or having the player character describe everything in the first-person.  Personally I would tend to prefer the latter, although a large part of that is because I really disliked the narrator voice in The Silver Lining games.

Also, would you think it was actually odd for the characters to talk, but for you to be expected to read descriptions etc?   

[Hudders]

Yes, I think I do prefer it if everything is voiced. It makes everything consistent.

That said, if the object is a sign or something that the character reads and it is big enough for me to read it as well, I'd sooner not have the character bother to read it out unless he has something to say about the sign that I can't myself read, (does that make sense?).

[Anian]

If a narrator or the main character or any other voice that is present for a lot of time is annoying to a player, then it doesn't matter what it is, making just some parts not voiced won't help anything. But as Hud said, if it is voiced then I usually find it immersion jerking when something is not voiced.
Unless the character is generally mute or the story is more important than the character, I think voiced main character is preferred over narrator to most people.

That said, if the object is a sign or something that the character reads and it is big enough for me to read it as well, I'd sooner not have the character bother to read it out unless he has something to say about the sign that I can't myself read, (does that make sense?).

Of course it's always better that the character makes a "useful" or "atmospheric" observation like "it looks old" or something.

[LTGiants2000]

If a narrator or the main character or any other voice that is present for a lot of time is annoying to a player, then it doesn't matter what it is, making just some parts not voiced won't help anything. But as Hud said, if it is voiced then I usually find it immersion jerking when something is not voiced.
Unless the character is generally mute or the story is more important than the character, I think voiced main character is preferred over narrator to most people.

That said, if the object is a sign or something that the character reads and it is big enough for me to read it as well, I'd sooner not have the character bother to read it out unless he has something to say about the sign that I can't myself read, (does that make sense?).

Of course it's always better that the character makes a "useful" or "atmospheric" observation like "it looks old" or something.

I agree about the immersion thing...it's hard to go from listening to being forced to read and then back again. I actually prefer a narrator to describe objects but that's only IF he/she has a good, clear speaking voice.

[Eggie]

Turning off the spoken narration was the best feature in Gabriel Knight 1.

If you're going to do long, adventure-gamey descriptions I really think the written word is the way to go. No-one hates reading.

[Ghost]

Depending on your game, a narrator/full voice-over combo has potential- I really liked how the character Larry* would often go into dialogue with the narrator (and would always be out-witted).

But personally I like full voice-overs for "full immersion". It's already very strange that a person standing in a room all alone will describe the contents of a cupboard aloud, but players usually understand that as "part of an adventure game". Voice-overs give you good control over emotion, too, so you can make a shocked exclamation all the more intense, for example.

----------
* Leisure Suit, that is!

[CaptainD]

Thanks all for your feedback, it's really helpful.