(03-30-2015, 03:33 PM)allgivenover Wrote:I see what you're getting at, and indeed I think a lot of people prefer the sub for that reason. But in reality, doesn't what you say just supply a more convincing reason for them to pick the sub? If the acting is of deficient quality and unconvincing, it would be better to pick the audio track in which it is least obvious. So in actuality, picking the track you can't understand makes much more sense. At the very least, if the track is overacted, you won't know. I don't see anything innately wrong with that.(03-30-2015, 03:22 PM)Caspar Wrote: It seems to me most of the people who picked sub in this thread understand at least a little Japanese or are used to picking subs.
Knowing a smattering of nouns/verbs is not the same as being able to hear the difference between 帰る and 変ãˆã‚‹ or being able to tell if someone is over acting vs phoning the performance in.
Also context is pretty important. I guess it's cool you know some kanji, but you can probably distinguish between frog and return depending on the sentence it's used in in most situations. I'd like to give the viewer the benefit of the doubt and not assume they're an idiot. I think that in itself is the difference between our perspectives on this; you're assuming they don't know and I'm assuming they do, and in both cases it's probably inaccurate lol.
It's true that there are plenty of people who just hear noise when the JP dub is used, and are ignorant of who acts well and who lacks skill. Likewise I think there are a lot of people who can more or less tell when someone's being robotic or unconvincing regardless of language, because sometimes emotional inflection is universal. Sure, I don't expect the average viewer to be able to understand why someone like say, Omigawa Chiaki is generally laughed at when she tries to perform compared to the average VA, but I do assume that people can notice a difference in how voice direction is carried out. I think in either case assuming the worst of the listener, or assuming they have greater acumen than they really do, is probably flawed, but frankly, I'd rather do it my way.
Here's a great example of why the idea that voice direction is done like a shotgun and is no more micromanaged in the dub than in the sub is false: Yoshiyuki Tomino, when directing series, generally harassed and forced retakes on a lot of his VA to gain a more natural, "human" tone. But since he's rather unstable himself, many people feel the voice acting in Gundam series he directs is clipped and awkward. This might be only one case, but it is a great example of why the original voicework is intrinsically connected to the original intentions of the creator. A lot of viewers who aren't aware of this still can recognize the difference in "Tominospeak" when compared to more conventionally acted shows.
And again, like I mentioned in my last post, the standards differ based on region. I'd much rather have an overacted than underacted vocal track, though neither applies to the JP dub of FFXIV in my opinion. Sawashiro is pretty understated as usual as well as Ikeda. I mean, I did laugh a lot hearing Char as Lahabrea, but that's more due to my familiarity with his voice than anything else.
That brings up another point I hadn't considered earlier: Because voice acting is a heavily established industry in Japan, casting choice also plays upon typecasting and stereotypes that don't exist in our industry. Specific, familiar voices being used against type or according to type can really help enrich the experience. The same thing happens with Western live action work all the time. It's sort of like how when you see Wakamoto Norio in the credits list, it's likely he will be a villain. Plenty of series have derived some comedic value off the fact that viewers expect this.
ã€Œè’¼æ°—ç ²ã€ã‚’使ã‚ã–ã‚‹ã‚’å¾—ãªã„!
AV by Kura-Ou
Wiki (Last updated 01/16)
My Balmung profile.
AV by Kura-Ou
Wiki (Last updated 01/16)
My Balmung profile.
