Fallout 3 OXM 10/11 confirmed
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
I dunno, I am waiting to actually play the damn game in my own way so I can see it myself (Kill only when I need to or when attacked), not watch some idiot shoot his way through because dialogue gives him a headache. I'll see for myself if this is a "badly modified Oblivion" or not.Arash said:
A score of 11 in OXM gets the game the Mecha-Godzilla's Choice Award and is described as a unicorn. Problem is that a game will never get an 11. EVER.
Brother None said:
True.
But when I hear descriptions like "genuinely compelling" repeated again and again I become more than suspicious.
It is more often to hear formed opinion about game for instance but without logical argumentation supporting it. "Story is compelling because... it is". "Isometric view is bad because is... old". And so on, so on.
Such judgement seems empty to me. I do not like geting another "nothing". I sometimes really want to know why someone liked something or not.
Reviews mostly do not seems as reviews anymore but rather like an advertisement.
BTW: What does AAA mean when games are cosidered? I went through web looking for some explanation but haven't found any that would clear it to me. [I am not very good with all those newest, latest stuff].
I actually liked Mass Effect's dialog system. The responses were condensed down to main ideas, which are then elaborated upon, much like the human thought pattern during speech.
For example, when someone says "Fallout 3 is just a total conversion mod for Oblivion." You think either "What?" or "Damn straight", and then elaborate on that simple thought, making it into a sentance of paragraph.
It kept things short, while still feeling functional. In short, by working the way our minds do, it kept the conversations flowing. Should Fallout 3 be like that? Not in my opinion, but it is a nice system.
For example, when someone says "Fallout 3 is just a total conversion mod for Oblivion." You think either "What?" or "Damn straight", and then elaborate on that simple thought, making it into a sentance of paragraph.
It kept things short, while still feeling functional. In short, by working the way our minds do, it kept the conversations flowing. Should Fallout 3 be like that? Not in my opinion, but it is a nice system.
Ranne said:
Yes, that seems like a fair representation of what I said. It's not like I - say - only compared the key word thing between Oblivion and ME, and it's not like I criticized all of BIS' dialogue systems (including Fallout's, although that's Interplay TSR) in the same post.
Ranne said:
Ok. Explain to me what the structural difference is between key phrases and key words.
Ranne said:
You're saying there's no functional difference between knowing the full sentence your character is going to state before you chose the option or only hearing what your character has to say after the choice is already made?
It works fairly well for Mass Effect because its dialogue, like any BioWare dialogue, is linear and strewn with fake choices. If making actual significant choices in dialogue - like Fallout should - it is very important to know exactly what your character is going to say up ahead, no matter if it's voiced or not.
Ranne said:
Of who? My very first comment on this was about how I hate it when magazines like OXM match up all RPGs to Mass Effect in dialogue. Notice how he says "post-Mass Effect era". We've had an earlier preview expressing disappointment that there are still RPGs that use the "old-fashioned" rather than "Mass Effect" dialogue system.
All I'm doing is expressing my dislike of that conformism. I think Mass Effect's dialogue system is flawed, but it fits the faux-film functionality of ME and I've not said I disapprove of Mass Effect utiliziing it, have I?
Ranne said:
I don't. All the game industry is doing is taking as a model an industry that is limited by elements that the gaming industry should not have as limits; linear storytelling, focus on excellence in storytelling expression rather than story choice. These are limits that are not necessary to gaming and while I don't mind that there are games that have it (I never mind the existence of certain genre of games, unlike many of NMA's criticasters), it does bother me that no one seems open-minded about analysing the limitations this path offers and acknowledging it should not be the sole path of video gaming.
MGS 4, anyone?
Ranne said:
Only I explained, with arguments, what I think the flaws of this system are. You have yet to name a counter-argument, other than repeating your initial argument ("it's stupid to read out what was just said")
Ranne said:
Wasn't that what I was arguing against? Do you even bother reading the posts of the people you argue with?
S said:
Games with a budget of over 20 million USD and the media that focuses almost solely on those games.
requiem_for_a_starfury
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Top right paragon, bottom right renegade, the other directions as needed. It might as well have used key words because the sentences barely gave any indication of the actual speech chosen.Ranne said:
Of course it would, for one thing you would be able to make an informed choice about what your character is going to say. Without surprises, so that you won't make a choice that goes against the characterization you've chosen, you know actual roleplaying. And being able to read what the character says before they actually say it, isn't that different from playing the game with subtitles on.Ranne said:
Trouble with the film in game format, is that the structure of films doesn't lend itself to all game genres, maybe corridor shooters but certainly not rpgs. In fact the cinematic approach to gaming is the total antithesis of role playing gaming.Ranne said:
Ranne said:
The reason I would like those dialogues spelled out completely before hand is that a lot of context can and does get lost. I found the dialogue choice wheel in Mass Effect to be stupid. It shows a lack of trust in the gamer, on the part of the developer, that they had to colour code your responses. I wouldn't call that making the dialogue rich and complex- I'd call that hand-holding. No more repetitive than what we ended up with in the finished product.
Spelling out the dialogue, at most, has has you spend a few extra seconds reading. Sure, maybe if you suffer from ADHD, that could be a problem. For myself, it helps to further the immersion. Call it a mini-game unto itself, if you must. If the player doesn't need to read- just simply go for a Blue(paragon), Grey(neutral), or Red(renegade) responses(sure you can turn this off, but then you're left with idiot-speak dialogue choices), then it trivializes the dialogue to a point where you aren't playing the most meaningful parts of the game anymore- you're just watching them unfold.
BORING!
Mass Effect should have ditched the hokey red/grey/blue system, let the player read the full choices, and gauge for themselves how they'd like to respond to each situation based on the syntax/nuance of the words written. Or do they not trust their writers either?
Bioware already took out all the typical RPG stats and left you with nothing but skill progressions (which didn't really matter in the end). Reducing dialogue choices to dumbed down colour choices removed one of the last ways you had to actively role play your character with some degree of realism. I say realism, because while I'd want the choices fully typed out- I'd also like the developer to assume that the player has at least the degree of common sense that god gave a goddamn rutabaga.
How fucking hard is it to understand what you're reading/saying when it comes to conversing with other people and making life choices? Is this a case of art accommodating/imitating life, because they don't they teach that anymore in schools each day before sending these mongoloids home to their cave-dwellings? It was an M rated game, for god sakes. If you're old enough to buy and play it, then shouldn't you already have a working knowledge/familiarity in dealing with people on a face to face basis?
It's garbage like that that gets game players so polarised and incensed. Mass effect did have bright spots, but in every place that didn't matter. I honestly can't tell anymore. Are games just naturally/progressively/(regressively?) getting dumbed down in parallel to audiences? Or is the industry deliberately catering to this new wave of functionally and socially retarded sons of bitches?
Like the pip-boy telling you if you've gotten bad or good karma... or if you're going to make a good or bad dialogue choice... It's just weak. Live a little! Hell, dare to think a little! If the outcome of a dialogue is going to be a surprise, then let ME make that mistake on my own after having read the choices -in full. And then after I have made my semi-informed/uninformed choice, feel free to show me, in whatever medium the game provides, how "right" or "wrong" I am. If as developers or fellow players you can't grasp that, then please... I implore you...
GET OUT OF MY GODDAMN HOBBY!
YOU RETARDS!
/sighs...
God, I hate these... "gamers".
aenemic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
while Mass Effect's dialogue system was a bit simple, it was in no way meant to be dumbed down. the game isn't supposed to have very deep rpg elements. it's an action rpg that is very story-driven and cinematic. and for the dialogue to work well and fluently, they used keywords (or whatever you want to call them). it's NOT the same as Oblivion, and if you think it is then there's no real need to discuss this issue as you obviously don't know what you're talking about.
I absolutely hated the "dialogue" (actually more of a monologue) system in Oblivion but I really really liked the system in Mass Effect. why? because in Oblivion I didn't feel like I was having a conversation with another person. it feeling of just pressing a button and getting a very bland and predictable response was overwhelming. in Mass Effect I saw a deep and emotional conversation, often between more than two parts, and I felt like everything I said was more or less meaningful.
there are not a lot of games where I've felt to intrigued and immersed in my character as in Mass Effect. sure, I didn't always know exactly what she's say once I picked a response, but I always knew what tone and meaning it would have. and that's all that mattered. I have absolutely no problem with reading a big chunk of text before I choose my response (actually I prefer it) but with a cinematic dialogue system such as in Mass Effect it just wouldn't work. hell, look at for example Deus Ex - the dialogue choices are often full sentences from what I can remember, but usually your character chooses other words than what you picked. that's also because of your character having voiced lines and because of the more cinematic feel. that game is not supposed to have deep branching dialogues either. I think Mass Effect took a que from such games as Deus Ex and improved upon it rather than dumbing down your normal text-based dialogue system.
and you can argue as much as you want about not knowing exactly what your character is going to say in a conversation. what is the difference between reading all that text first and just hearing your character say it really? you still don't get to choose exactly what to say. the developers have already chosen the exact words for you. actually, I'm pretty sure there are more conversations in Mass Effect where you get to choose different reactions to a given situation than in Fallout 1. the difference being that in Fallout 1, when you get to choose you often have a much deeper consequence than in Mass Effect. either way, your dialogue choices are still set it stone.
I absolutely hated the "dialogue" (actually more of a monologue) system in Oblivion but I really really liked the system in Mass Effect. why? because in Oblivion I didn't feel like I was having a conversation with another person. it feeling of just pressing a button and getting a very bland and predictable response was overwhelming. in Mass Effect I saw a deep and emotional conversation, often between more than two parts, and I felt like everything I said was more or less meaningful.
there are not a lot of games where I've felt to intrigued and immersed in my character as in Mass Effect. sure, I didn't always know exactly what she's say once I picked a response, but I always knew what tone and meaning it would have. and that's all that mattered. I have absolutely no problem with reading a big chunk of text before I choose my response (actually I prefer it) but with a cinematic dialogue system such as in Mass Effect it just wouldn't work. hell, look at for example Deus Ex - the dialogue choices are often full sentences from what I can remember, but usually your character chooses other words than what you picked. that's also because of your character having voiced lines and because of the more cinematic feel. that game is not supposed to have deep branching dialogues either. I think Mass Effect took a que from such games as Deus Ex and improved upon it rather than dumbing down your normal text-based dialogue system.
and you can argue as much as you want about not knowing exactly what your character is going to say in a conversation. what is the difference between reading all that text first and just hearing your character say it really? you still don't get to choose exactly what to say. the developers have already chosen the exact words for you. actually, I'm pretty sure there are more conversations in Mass Effect where you get to choose different reactions to a given situation than in Fallout 1. the difference being that in Fallout 1, when you get to choose you often have a much deeper consequence than in Mass Effect. either way, your dialogue choices are still set it stone.
The "flaw" of the Mass Effect's system is not a flaw at all. It allows you to set the tone of discussion without going into unnecessary details that, once again, you will hear a mere second later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Dypybxyx6A
If there were that functional difference within the context of the conversation, I have to admit, I wasn't able to identify it. Would it be practical or in any way sensible to replace all current text choices with the actual replies? Not in my view.
As I mentioned earlier, Mass Effect took an entirely different route with their storytelling techniques. Where Fallout went for a multiplicity (often consequentially resultless) of dialog trees, Mass Effect went for realism in emotional responses, cinematic experience and clearly defined dramatic narrative. To be fair, the story did lack any literary depth and many of its flaws weren't exactly that one could sincerely call minor, but it doesn't really make these sensitive criticisms of the general design of their speech engine system any more valid.
By the way, first you go:
P.S. As for the "Spend a few extra seconds reading second-rate scripts, get a sense of superiority in return" reading "argument" from another poster: I'd comment on it but I didn't really bother reading the rest of your post. Blame it on my ADD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Dypybxyx6A
Code:
...
Choice: "What's the problem?"
Voice: "Are there laws being broken here?"
...
Choice: "Let me talk to it"
Voice: "If you like, I can talk to the Hanar for you"
Choice: "This isn't the way"
Voice: "Is this really how you want to represent the Enkindlers?"
...
Choice: "This is unfitting for you"
Voice: "Is this how the Enkindlers would want you to use this gift of conciousness?"
...
Choice: "Not this way"
Voice: "If the Protheans wanted you to force the Message onto unwilling, they would have said so."As I mentioned earlier, Mass Effect took an entirely different route with their storytelling techniques. Where Fallout went for a multiplicity (often consequentially resultless) of dialog trees, Mass Effect went for realism in emotional responses, cinematic experience and clearly defined dramatic narrative. To be fair, the story did lack any literary depth and many of its flaws weren't exactly that one could sincerely call minor, but it doesn't really make these sensitive criticisms of the general design of their speech engine system any more valid.
By the way, first you go:
And a post later, it's:
If you're not criticizing more linear in-depth design for not being more non-linear shallower one, we have nothing else to discuss here. If you are, then not only do I disagree with the overall validity of your criticism, but I also think that it mostly comes as a reflection of individual bias on your part.
P.S. As for the "Spend a few extra seconds reading second-rate scripts, get a sense of superiority in return" reading "argument" from another poster: I'd comment on it but I didn't really bother reading the rest of your post. Blame it on my ADD.
bonustime
First time out of the vault
Pretty disappointed that your character isn't voiced. Not sure why I assumed it was going to be though
Ranne said:
As I said, it somewhat works better for Mass Effect because the dialogue is simplified. But again, we're arguing against someone who states that this dialogue system should be universal. And I think you and I both agree: it shouldn't.
Ranne said:
I said the same thing twice: I'm not a big fan of Mass Effect's faux-film wet dream, but if your game has that format then this dialogue system fits. It's a broken dialogue system in a broken game. It fits.
Ranne said:
In general, I do think that linear games are a disappointment in as far as they do not exploit what games uniquely can. If I want to watch a film I'll watch a film.
But I'm not an exclusivist. People enjoy Mass Effect and BioWare's other linear offerings, and I have no problem with that. Hell, I enjoy them too, though not a lot. I do have a problem with this discourse, as exemplified by mister OXM, that this design school is not just superior (which you can always argue about) but so superior that it should exist to the exclusion of other game design types.
PaladinHeart
Mildly Dipped
Interesting debate, aside from the one post where someone thought adding several expletives might better prove their point.
Mass Effect sounds interesting. I can't really judge though, considering I haven't played it myself.
It's always nice to see dialog that has more than just Yes/Good, No/Evil, and a "this choice isn't valid, circle please!"
If a game is going to have that third option in that way then it shouldn't even be there unless it's a way of asking for more information. If your choices have no effect on the outcome then there should not even be any choices to begin with.
If a choice simply presents more information to the player, then tell them anyway. Less work making the dialog that way.
Another thing about dialog that isn't often used, is taking away the option to talk if there's nothing more to be said/asked. If there's information that might be important then I think that should all be in the PC's journal.
Whether it's a short or long choice doesn't really matter to me, as long as it's an actual choice with benefits/consequences.
Mass Effect sounds interesting. I can't really judge though, considering I haven't played it myself.
It's always nice to see dialog that has more than just Yes/Good, No/Evil, and a "this choice isn't valid, circle please!"
If a game is going to have that third option in that way then it shouldn't even be there unless it's a way of asking for more information. If your choices have no effect on the outcome then there should not even be any choices to begin with.
If a choice simply presents more information to the player, then tell them anyway. Less work making the dialog that way.
Another thing about dialog that isn't often used, is taking away the option to talk if there's nothing more to be said/asked. If there's information that might be important then I think that should all be in the PC's journal.
Whether it's a short or long choice doesn't really matter to me, as long as it's an actual choice with benefits/consequences.
aenemic
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Brother None said:
that's a bit harsh. why exactly is Mass Effect a broken game? because you don't like it? well, too bad... not all games are made for you to like. they aimed at creating a very Star Wars inspired space saga, and that they did. if you don't like the story, then that's your personal opinion. if you don't like the gameplay... again, your opinion. the developers have never claimed the game to be something it's not. thus, the game is not broken.
aronsearle
Still Mildly Glowing
The thing is, in fallout you are supposed to play a role, of whatever you choose to be.
So when you can play dozens of different "personalities" (Say a diplomat or a brute), of either sex, and with multiple dialogue options.
Do you think having just two voices, male or female, can do that justice?
It works for mass effect, because the character is pre-defined, you have the option of male or female Shepard.
PaladinHeart
Mildly Dipped
The PC voice in Oblivion was pretty annoying. I hope they didn't do the same thing for Fallout 3. Your character should be silent at all times, even if they are getting disemboweled.
aenemic said:
It's an overstatement of a point I make more balanced elsewhere in the post (that linear heavy-narrative games disappoint in failing to exploit unique opportunities of games)
PaladinHeart said:
The PC wasn't voiced in Oblivion.
Alphadrop
A right proper chap.
Yes he/she was, went "oof" when got hit or "argh" when fell of a cliff (well when he/she got to the bottom).