I... really, really like Fallout 4. Oh, god.

[Magnus]

You know me. I'm that hardcore, NMA-card-carrying RPG enthusiast with several mods for Fallout 2 and New Vegas under my belt, and the box art for Planescape: Torment as my desktop wallpaper. I hate Bethesda for everything they have done to my most beloved series. When Fallout 3 came out I played it for six hours and ragequitted with the fire of a thousand suns. I've tried to get back in it numerous times since then, but I can't. I hate it.

But I can't bring myself to hate Fallout 4.

There is one other game that has occupied as much of my time as Fallout 2 over the years, and that is Skyrim. Borderlands comes as a close second, but Skyrim is my number one time-waster. I have over 900 hours in that game, most of them with Requiem of course, but still, I've clocked in almost a thousand hours in a Bethesda game, knowing full well it's made by the same guys who are responsible for the spontaneous abortion that is Fallout 3. I don't know why I like it so much. Maybe it's because I'm Norwegian, speak Icelandic and am really into Nordic folklore. Maybe it's the werewolf mechanic and the Dawnguard questline (I also like gothic stuff). I honestly don't know.

But I do know that Fallout 4 feels more like Skyrim than like Fallout 3. I am hesitant to call Fallout 4 a true RPG, but then again I won't call unmodded Skyrim one either. Skyrim is, to me, a fantasy hack-and-slash with crafting elements thrown in, a fun, light-hearted romp through the forest, where quests and dialogue are much less significant than combat and world exploration - in short, the sum of all the things that Bethesda does really well. And to me, Fallout 4 feels like that. It feels like a game that manages to do the "Bethesda formula" really well, rather than try to be a Fallout game or even a serious RPG, and fail miserably at it.

With this in mind, that is, treating Fallout 4 like it's completely unrelated to the Fallout franchise, here are the things I feel Bethesda have actually succeeded at this time, either because of careful research or simply by a tremendous amount of luck:

1. No repair system.
Oh good lord. I didn't realize how much I hated Fallout 3 and New Vegas' weapon repair system until it was gone. When I first picked up the Laser Musket my instinctive response was "better not use this too much, it'll break in ten shots and then I'll have to find another one to repair it with." That is not how you should feel when picking up an awesome new weapon. Fallout 1 and 2 knew that. You did not feel that way when you broke into the Sierra Army Depot and came out of it carrying an enormous Plasma Rifle. In fact, that Plasma Rifle never left your active slot since. You used it to melt puppies, children, raiders, fire geckoes and anyone who looked at you funny, with no discrimination or concern for ammo. Then you took it to New Reno and upgraded it to a TURBO Plasma Rifle and then you installed F2WR so it fired even faster. A Fallout game is one where you love your weapons, and Fallout 4 makes it easier to do so, in no small part because they don't break all the time, but also because of...

2. Weapon mods galore
Hell yes. This was the only part of Fallout 4's E3 keynote that I actually felt good about, and so far it has not disappointed (although I wish installing better receivers came with a visible change). I have modded my 10mm pistol into a huge, unwieldy hunk of metal with a scope on, and named it Humungus. It uses cheap and plentiful ammo, and kills things a mile away. My other gun is a shabby-looking fully automatic .38 cal pipe rifle with a bayonet on it, named Plinky, and I have a bladed tire iron for emergencies. I love searching for junk to make new and crazy weapon mods (far more than using it in the settlement building system which I'm ambivalent to at this point, although I did spend all yesterday planting melons). This is partly because:

3. Loot is more meaningful
Remember in Fallout 3 when you'd break open a 75 skill level locked chest hidden away in a fortified bunker protected by angry turrets and landmines, to reveal the following princely treasure:

Vacuum Cleaner
Clipboard
Teddy bear
32 10mm ammo
Cup
121 Bottle Caps
.38 Revolver

Shittiest game in the world. Now, I'm not saying that random loot is a good thing, because I don't believe it is, but at least more of it is useful now, and going on scavenging runs makes more sense. In Fallout 4 the above loot would at least have given you materials for crafting, which encourages you to raid houses and check out new places. New Vegas had a similar selling point with the need for materials to build Repair Kits, it gave me a little leap of joy whenever I found Wrenches or Duct Tape and not to mention Fission Batteries for my Hoverboard. Whereas in both Fallout 3 and Skyrim you are never actively looking for something, you just sweep up whatever is salable, dump it off at the nearest merchant and buy the stuff you actually need (which isn't much). I have yet to find more than one merchant in Fallout 4, and the one I found didn't have what I needed, which is duct tape and more duct tape. I had to go snooping around the houses in Concord to find that. And what else did I find in Concord, but a suit of...

4. Power Armor is on point
Besides the aforementioned Plasma Rifle and similar endgame guns, there was one huge equipment goodie in Fallout 1 and 2, and that was power armor. This is one point where Fallout 3 and New Vegas really shit the bed, what with the bullshit requirement for training before you can use it, and rubbish stats when you do. Power Armor is supposed to give you an intense feeling of joy and, well, power, and in Fallout 4 it does exactly that. It gives me a massive, servo-assisted, steelclad boner. The HUD sends shivers of glee down my spine when I look at it, the sound is perfect, the clunky animation is amazing... I cannot find a single fault with it. The fact that you find it so early is balanced by how rare fusion cores are, and you can still upgrade it afterwards, so they're not giving us the final armor tier 2 hours into the game. Speaking of fusion cores, there's a reason why I gave my character such a high Intelligence, and that is...

5. Perks make sense
Get a load of this: I am glad that the skills are gone. This is not because I feel that skills are an inherently bad mechanic, but because Bethesda don't know how to use it properly, and never have. In fact, neither did Black Isle or Interplay. Let's be honest, when was the last time in Fallout 2 that you leveled Barter, First Aid, Gambling, Sneak, Throwing or Traps (apart from assassinating Bishop, which I admit is a valid reason)? And even when you did level one of the useful skills, what part of that was enjoyable aside from seeing a number go up? Leveling a weapon skill just gives you an increased chance to hit, but taking a perk related to that skill makes something interesting happen, like doing bleed damage with axes, or getting armor penetration effects with shotguns, or increasing your armor when unarmed. I feel that perks are a better way to represent your character's specializations and aptitudes than just a number that gradually increases to 100. In Fallout 2 the large majority of perks were useless, and few of them were related to your skills. In Fallout 3 there were more skill-related perks, but all they did was give you skillpoints. In New Vegas they finally put in loads of perks that affected the way you use a skill, and now I feel we've reached a good place where your character is defined almost solely by their perks, all of which have significant effects when you take them and determine how the game plays.

I could go on about how good the game looks even on my potato of a computer that can barely run it at low settings, or how much more cohesive the world feels (finally, people need farms in order to survive). I could also complain about bad animations and lipsync (which I don't care about, because I play it first-person and only read the subtitles), and somewhat iffy combat (which doesn't bother me because I use VATS all the time), but I'll stop here. Fallout 4 is a much better game than Fallout 3, not because it tries to be a better RPG (it is hardly an RPG at all, and the king of RPGs is still Fallout 2), but because it has finally figured out who it is.

 

[AskWazzup]

Are there any special, hand placed loot and unique enemies that you are not led to by hand? That is one of my gripes with bethesda games, that they make you anticipate something really cool, but it never ends that way (unlike in, say gothic games).

And how do you deal with stupid writing? When i see the dialogue in bethesda games, it just immediately makes me think of some fat dude with a goatee, sitting at a desk and writing something that he thinks is very deep. It just ruins the whole thing. I feel that their games would be better served if they would just get rid of dialogue and long talks.

 

[Dr Fallout]

God save you my child.

Nah, I don't really mind if you like it, but as long as you realize these key things there's no problem.

1. The writing is shit.
2. The dialogue is shit.
3. The quests are shit.
4. The choices are shit.

 

[Magnus]

Are there any special, hand placed loot and unique enemies that you are not led to by hand? That is one of my gripes with bethesda games, that they make you anticipate something really cool, but it never ends that way (unlike in, say gothic games).

And how do you deal with stupid writing? When i see the dialogue in bethesda games, it just immediately makes me think of some fat dude with a goatee, sitting at a desk and writing something that he thinks is very deep. It just ruins the whole thing. I feel that their games would be better served if they would just get rid of dialogue and long talks.

I deal with stupid writing by expecting it to be bad, and not caring about the story or the characters in the game. If you sit down to play Diablo 3 or Borderlands 2 you do not expect to be swept off your feet by the story, nor should you be by any game made by Bethesda. The last Fallout RPG was Fallout 2, but Bethesda makes good shoot-n-loot/hack-n-slash games, and that's what I expected this one to be. Think of it as Fallout: Tactics 2. Although I must say, Codsworth is a very well written character, and in general the dialogue and voice acting is simply much better than in previous games. It's still not up there with the classics, but it's a few notches above what we're used to from Bethesda.

The problem with loot you described is exactly why I hate randomized loot so much (and why I could never get into Wasteland 2 despite the good qualities it has). Very early in the game you do find a legendary weapon, safely locked behind a very difficult lock, and your character even exclaims that he will come back for it later. If you do not invest in lockpicking perks, you will never get that weapon, so that's good. I killed a raider boss, and while the weapon he dropped wasn't unique, it was far better than the other drops I had seen so far. There is a non-random Army Helmet close to Sanctuary, and it has better damage resistance than the rest of my armor combined. So it does seem that they've made a bit more effort not to rely completely on the random generator, and when they do at least the stuff it coughs up is useful, as I described in the first post.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Yeah so you fit my, MY, criteria.

No clashing will commence.

 

[Magnus]

God save you my child.

Nah, I don't really mind if you like it, but as long as you realize these key things there's no problem.

1. The writing is shit.
2. The dialogue is shit.
3. The quests are shit.
4. The choices are shit.

They are still better than Skyrim or Fallout 3. Not as good as New Vegas, but definitely better than I had feared.

 

[Dr Fallout]

God save you my child.

Nah, I don't really mind if you like it, but as long as you realize these key things there's no problem.

1. The writing is shit.
2. The dialogue is shit.
3. The quests are shit.
4. The choices are shit.

They are still better than Skyrim or Fallout 3. Not as good as New Vegas, but definitely better than I had feared.

Wait what.

If you mean number 1... maybe... any others and we clash.

 

[shengar]

Everybody have their own guilty pleasure, no worries (;
Though I really admire how you able to handle the bad story with expectation and not offended by it afterward. I'll probably wouldn't be able to handle it after a few minute even after expecting it to be bad since this is supposed to be Fallout game after all.

Nah, I don't really mind if you like it, but as long as you realize these key things there's no problem.

1. The writing is shit.
2. The dialogue is shit.
3. The quests are shit.
4. The choices are shit.

They are still better than Skyrim or Fallout 3. Not as good as New Vegas, but definitely better than I had feared.

Wait what.

If you mean number 1... maybe... any others and we clash.

Well while he thought the story isn't as bad as he expected it to be, it still shit in the end.
It's like you expecting a bull shit but got a dog shit instead. Less smelly, smaller, easier to clean, but still shit.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Yeah same here.

 

[AskWazzup]

I deal with stupid writing by expecting it to be bad, and not caring about the story or the characters in the game. If you sit down to play Diablo 3 or Borderlands 2 you do not expect to be swept off your feet by the story, nor should you be by any game made by Bethesda. The last Fallout RPG was Fallout 2, but Bethesda makes good shoot-n-loot/hack-n-slash games, and that's what I expected this one to be. Think of it as Fallout: Tactics 2. Although I must say, Codsworth is a very well written character, and in general the dialogue and voice acting is simply much better than in previous games. It's still not up there with the classics, but it's a few notches above what we're used to from Bethesda.

I loved tactics and diablo 2 (only played the trial of the 3d, and was not a big fan), but they never waived their story and dialogue dick at you and there were hardly any people to talk to. Whilst in a beth game you talk to countless characters and i feel that there is just not any way to avoid it.

The problem with loot you described is exactly why I hate randomized loot so much (and why I could never get into Wasteland 2 despite the good qualities it has). Very early in the game you do find a legendary weapon, safely locked behind a very difficult lock, and your character even exclaims that he will come back for it later. If you do not invest in lockpicking perks, you will never get that weapon, so that's good. I killed a raider boss, and while the weapon he dropped wasn't unique, it was far better than the other drops I had seen so far. There is a non-random Army Helmet close to Sanctuary, and it has better damage resistance than the rest of my armor combined. So it does seem that they've made a bit more effort not to rely completely on the random generator, and when they do at least the stuff it coughs up is useful, as I described in the first post.

A shame really, morrowind was so exciting with unique places, characters and loot. I remember finding that Yagrum Bagarn guy and it was so unexpected and cool, likewise with the dungeons and weapons.

 

[shengar]

Just edit my post.

But seriously, from the summary the story isn't as bad as FO3 and Skyrim. Both of them are worse than what an imaginative child could write.

Also randomized loot in a non-Diablo-like game should be illegal. It is lazy and lack of effort to put any detail to the world you build.

 

[Magnus]

God save you my child.

Nah, I don't really mind if you like it, but as long as you realize these key things there's no problem.

1. The writing is shit.
2. The dialogue is shit.
3. The quests are shit.
4. The choices are shit.

They are still better than Skyrim or Fallout 3. Not as good as New Vegas, but definitely better than I had feared.

Wait what.

If you mean number 1... maybe... any others and we clash.

I mean that Fallout 3 scored "godawful" on 1, 2 and 3, and only slightly better on 4 (I admit being a Slaver and putting a collar on the guard in Tenpenny Tower was fun), and Skyrim is a straight up zero on all of them. With the bar that low, it doesn't take much to improve it. New Vegas is a whole different ballpark. The only story-related aspect that's better than New Vegas in Fallout 4 is the voice acting, but that's not relevant to me. I haven't played enough to determine if there are any meaningful choices you can take, but so far the characters seem far more believable and less "videogamey" than in previous games. I like Codsworth for example, and that Sturges guy you help rebuild Sanctuary.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Are there any special, hand placed loot and unique enemies that you are not led to by hand? That is one of my gripes with bethesda games, that they make you anticipate something really cool, but it never ends that way (unlike in, say gothic games).

And how do you deal with stupid writing? When i see the dialogue in bethesda games, it just immediately makes me think of some fat dude with a goatee, sitting at a desk and writing something that he thinks is very deep. It just ruins the whole thing. I feel that their games would be better served if they would just get rid of dialogue and long talks.

I deal with stupid writing by expecting it to be bad, and not caring about the story or the characters in the game. If you sit down to play Diablo 3 or Borderlands 2 you do not expect to be swept off your feet by the story, nor should you be by any game made by Bethesda. The last Fallout RPG was Fallout 2, but Bethesda makes good shoot-n-loot/hack-n-slash games, and that's what I expected this one to be. Think of it as Fallout: Tactics 2. Although I must say, Codsworth is a very well written character, and in general the dialogue and voice acting is simply much better than in previous games. It's still not up there with the classics, but it's a few notches above what we're used to from Bethesda.

The problem with loot you described is exactly why I hate randomized loot so much (and why I could never get into Wasteland 2 despite the good qualities it has). Very early in the game you do find a legendary weapon, safely locked behind a very difficult lock, and your character even exclaims that he will come back for it later. If you do not invest in lockpicking perks, you will never get that weapon, so that's good. I killed a raider boss, and while the weapon he dropped wasn't unique, it was far better than the other drops I had seen so far. There is a non-random Army Helmet close to Sanctuary, and it has better damage resistance than the rest of my armor combined. So it does seem that they've made a bit more effort not to rely completely on the random generator, and when they do at least the stuff it coughs up is useful, as I described in the first post.

Don't take this as agressive post, you seem as a person fun enough to talk with.

But I feel that you're lowering your standarts in order to enjoy the content offered to you. That's certainly one way to go with it. If it works for you, that's ok. However, doesn't for me though. To much of the stuff in either Fallout 3 and 4 is simply too cringeworthy.

Not to mention that when it comes to Diablo 3, the game was not known for the same qualities that you got with Fallout 1 and 2. Very different games with different principles in mind. By the way, I always thought both Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 had almost perfect stories, certainly perfect in what they wanted to achieve. A point that I feel was not really followed in Diablo 3 where they tried to make the story about the The Player, instead of Some Player. A small example, in Diablo 2 the whole tone and vibe you get from the NPCs is that the fight is hopeless, that you're a great hero, though one from many. In Diablo 3, the approach to the game is on a more epic/cinematic level, where everyone expects you to save them. Because you're a nephalem, of course. In that sense Diablo 3 and Fallout 4 are very similar ... however, this was never the core of Fallout as game. Not if you're looking at it as RPG.

 

[Dr Fallout]

God save you my child.

Nah, I don't really mind if you like it, but as long as you realize these key things there's no problem.

1. The writing is shit.
2. The dialogue is shit.
3. The quests are shit.
4. The choices are shit.

They are still better than Skyrim or Fallout 3. Not as good as New Vegas, but definitely better than I had feared.

Wait what.

If you mean number 1... maybe... any others and we clash.

I mean that Fallout 3 scored "godawful" on 1, 2 and 3, and only slightly better on 4 (I admit being a Slaver and putting a collar on the guard in Tenpenny Tower was fun), and Skyrim is a straight up zero on all of them. With the bar that low, it doesn't take much to improve it. New Vegas is a whole different ballpark. The only story-related aspect that's better than New Vegas in Fallout 4 is the voice acting, but that's not relevant to me. I haven't played enough to determine if there are any meaningful choices you can take, but so far the characters seem far more believable and less "videogamey" than in previous games. I like Codsworth for example, and that Sturges guy you help rebuild Sanctuary.

Fair enough... like Crni said, you're nice so I can't fight. But Fallout 4 is still pretty shit.

 

[Magnus]

Are there any special, hand placed loot and unique enemies that you are not led to by hand? That is one of my gripes with bethesda games, that they make you anticipate something really cool, but it never ends that way (unlike in, say gothic games).

And how do you deal with stupid writing? When i see the dialogue in bethesda games, it just immediately makes me think of some fat dude with a goatee, sitting at a desk and writing something that he thinks is very deep. It just ruins the whole thing. I feel that their games would be better served if they would just get rid of dialogue and long talks.

I deal with stupid writing by expecting it to be bad, and not caring about the story or the characters in the game. If you sit down to play Diablo 3 or Borderlands 2 you do not expect to be swept off your feet by the story, nor should you be by any game made by Bethesda. The last Fallout RPG was Fallout 2, but Bethesda makes good shoot-n-loot/hack-n-slash games, and that's what I expected this one to be. Think of it as Fallout: Tactics 2. Although I must say, Codsworth is a very well written character, and in general the dialogue and voice acting is simply much better than in previous games. It's still not up there with the classics, but it's a few notches above what we're used to from Bethesda.

The problem with loot you described is exactly why I hate randomized loot so much (and why I could never get into Wasteland 2 despite the good qualities it has). Very early in the game you do find a legendary weapon, safely locked behind a very difficult lock, and your character even exclaims that he will come back for it later. If you do not invest in lockpicking perks, you will never get that weapon, so that's good. I killed a raider boss, and while the weapon he dropped wasn't unique, it was far better than the other drops I had seen so far. There is a non-random Army Helmet close to Sanctuary, and it has better damage resistance than the rest of my armor combined. So it does seem that they've made a bit more effort not to rely completely on the random generator, and when they do at least the stuff it coughs up is useful, as I described in the first post.

Don't take this as agressive post, you seem as a person fun enough to talk with.

But I feel that you're lowering your standarts in order to enjoy the content offered to you. That's certainly one way to go with it. If it works for you, that's ok. However, doesn't for me though. To much of the stuff in either Fallout 3 and 4 is simply too cringeworthy.

Not to mention that when it comes to Diablo 3, the game was not known for the same qualities that you got with Fallout 1 and 2. Very different games with different principles in mind. By the way, I always thought both Diablo 1 and Diablo 2 had almost perfect stories, certainly perfect in what they wanted to achieve. A point that I feel was not really followed in Diablo 3 where they tried to make the story about the The Player, instead of Some Player. A small example, in Diablo 2 the whole tone and vibe you get from the NPCs is that the fight is hopeless, that you're a great hero, though one from many. In Diablo 3, the approach to the game is on a more epic/cinematic level, where everyone expects you to save them. Because you're a nephalem, of course. In that sense Diablo 3 and Fallout 4 are very similar ... however, this was never the core of Fallout as game. Not if you're looking at it as RPG.

I'm not looking at Fallout 4 as an RPG. In my opinion the last Fallout game that could be called an RPG came out in 1998. I don't mind that the new ones don't have as high literary value, I can still go back and enjoy the old Black Isle games for that. The criteria that I measure the new games by is how much fun they are to play, not on how much they resemble previous games. Fallout 4 could have had no dialogue system at all, like Red Dead Redemption or GTA, and I still would have given it a high score for how much fun it is. It could have been a real-time strategy game, and if it were a good real-time strategy game I probably would have liked it as well.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I am not necessarily comparing it to previous games. It's enough to compare Fallout 3 and 4 to New Vegas for example, if all you want is to talk about the quality of writing, quest design, the narrative, in short, it's value as RPG. I am certainly not one of those people who's expecting or even demanding a carbon copy of Fallout 1 and/or 2. But Bethesda sells their games as RPGs. And it is a considence that I like RPGs. But what I personaly value in RPGs is sadly not done well in any of the recently released Bethesda games, while Morrowind didn't had the best writing either, it still had a lot of other qualities. Like a coherent world, great artistic design, and for the most part the story worked well enough. But most importantly, Morrowind was TES game. And all that Bethesda did, was taking Fallout and using their TES formula on it. More importantly their Oblivion/Skyrim formula, which I find very bland. If Fallout 3 had at least the same quality like New Vegas, I might have looked much different at the experience, because New Vegas has a least in many way great qualities as RPG, and also as Fallout game.

I mean what you like is what you like, fair enough. I can't nor will I argue about that. But I just feel that AAA gaming has lost a lot of diversity over the years, and the fact that Bethesda seems to have this need to turn Fallout with Fallout 4 in some kind of twistend Mass Effect/CoD-Border-Lands-CLone shows this very nicely. They don't follow their own visions ... they follow what is the current trend in gaming ...

 

[Magnus]

I am not necessarily comparing it to previous games. It's enough to compare Fallout 3 and 4 to New Vegas for example, if all you want is to talk about the quality of writing, quest design, the narrative, in short, it's value as RPG. I am certainly not one of those people who's expecting or even demanding a carbon copy of Fallout 1 and/or 2. But Bethesda sells their games as RPGs. And it is a considence that I like RPGs. But what I personaly value in RPGs is sadly not done well in any of the recently released Bethesda games, while Morrowind didn't had the best writing either, it still had a lot of other qualities. Like a coherent world, great artistic design, and for the most part the story worked well enough. But most importantly, Morrowind was TES game. And all that Bethesda did, was taking Fallout and using their TES formula on it. More importantly their Oblivion/Skyrim formula, which I find very bland. If Fallout 3 had at least the same quality like New Vegas, I might have looked much different at the experience, because New Vegas has a least in many way great qualities as RPG, and also as Fallout game.

I mean what you like is what you like, fair enough. I can't nor will I argue about that. But I just feel that AAA gaming has lost a lot of diversity over the years, and the fact that Bethesda seems to have this need to turn Fallout with Fallout 4 in some kind of twistend Mass Effect/CoD-Border-Lands-CLone shows this very nicely. They don't follow their own visions ... they follow what is the current trend in gaming ...

No, you're correct about all of this, I'm not disagreeing with you. I hope Obsidian take us back to proper role-playing grounds in the next installment, although that dialogue wheel is a bitch to work around.

 

[AskWazzup]

No, you're correct about all of this, I'm not disagreeing with you. I hope Obsidian take us back to proper role-playing grounds in the next installment, although that dialogue wheel is a bitch to work around.

It could work in one way. An option for chaotic character (chaos trait?) that can only engage in non trivial dialogue, where he would randomly choose and answer (provided there would be a wealth of choices) and you would watch the fireworks unfold. Well... ok, that is not happening, but it could be pretty sweat.

 

[phipboy]

I completely disagree about perks. Simple as that. It's a horrible system and playing it a bit I have concluded that it's awful. There is no strategy evolved, all of it comes down to how you assigned SPECIAL points and even that requires no strategy or thinking. If anything Strength and Intelligence seem to be the best probably. It also doesn't help that the game is really easy in general. Might be better than skills in some sense but it's a completely backwards system. Improving the actual skills and their balance would have been much better. Compared to FNV the lack of skills is really felt and the skills in the classic games didn't bother me too much. You know you didn't really have to increase your Barter, First Aid etc but that's what makes it a good RPG.

E: I can totally see though how some people who just completely switch their minds off and don't pay attention to the characters, writing, setting etc can enjoy the game. I can't really do that anymore as it's just awful to see so much potential lost.

 

[Magnus]

No, you're correct about all of this, I'm not disagreeing with you. I hope Obsidian take us back to proper role-playing grounds in the next installment, although that dialogue wheel is a bitch to work around.

It could work in one way. An option for chaotic character that can only engage in non trivial dialogue, where he would randomly choose and answer (provided there would be a wealth of choices) and you would watch the fireworks unfold. Well... ok, that is not happening, but it could be pretty sweat.

I think it works really well in Alpha Protocol, because you always know what sort of "mood" each of the three options represent. But I can't remember if it also lets you see the whole text when you're cycling through the options.

I will give Bethesda a measly little point for one thing, which is that there seems to be a lot more sarcastic options this time. Fallout 3 had absolutely no sarcasm, and that's not forgiveable.