It was a bad chose for fallout 4 , I mean really bad. But people still moaned about FNV and FO3 dialogue ? However when you return to playing them games dam does that system trump the dialogue system in FO4. Its like playing a completely new game
Fallout 4 went from Mostly Positive to Mixed in recent reviews
- Thread starter Irwin John Finster
- Start date
eissa
Artanis "Altáriel" Nerwen Nos Finwe
*poor attempt at humor*
one of the earlier interview by games informer is that the current conversation system was to giving Cinematic feeling with multiple NPC could join the conversation. the wrong thing they did is why they choose to go to mass effect style ith voiced protagonist?
Deeves
Well, he went a little funny in the head . . .
I still say a voiced protagonist could be done in Fallout with the right framing. If the main character was a backgroundless drifter like The Man with No Name from The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, the type of guy who says little but whatever he does say or do is really profound or badass, then it would be fine.
As it is the voiced protagonists just feel gross to play because they fight you every step of the way whenever you want to say something badass or influence the world with speech. It's always "Igor! Fetch me the Brain!" and "I've taken care of those raiders for you."
As it is the voiced protagonists just feel gross to play because they fight you every step of the way whenever you want to say something badass or influence the world with speech. It's always "Igor! Fetch me the Brain!" and "I've taken care of those raiders for you."
I think it was too tough to get one voice actor to account for every play style and that was the problem. People who liked to be bad in fallout games found it forced and not good at all. The character felt more suited to be good but ending being quite Bland for most
Black Angel
Grand Inquisitor of the Ordo Hereticus
Huh? Really? Doesn't seem to work like that. Hell, Underrail with its dialogue format worked far better to make multiple NPCs joining the conversation, lol.
I disagree. You would need to hire multiple voice actors so the player can choose which voices he want to choose for a character he would want to role-play. No matter how you try to twist it, it just wouldn't feel right. If the character we made only say very little, that would completely defeat the point of being able to role-play characters with more than 2-3 sentences to say (that is, characters with at least 4 INT). But that's not the bigger problem, because the elephant in the room is the voiced character itself.
Granted, one of, if not the ONLY cRPG to nail it with a voiced protagonist was Planescape: Torment (even though not all of the lines was voiced). But that was of different time where gaming was such a niche and, thus, the devs really, truly passionate in making games and whatever time constraints and "technical limitation" they have certainly helped and pushed them to made the game back then. Nowadays, though, game devs could simply get away with pretty graphics and hand-holding and still made money, no matter how hard a lil' bit of the fanbase hits them with fair criticism and it shows.
But then you'd just be playing THAT character instead of YOUR character.
A voiced protagonist adds too little of value and takes far too much away from your ability to roleplay. Adding it as a feature in an RPG isn't a worthy trade-off.
It can work in a game like the Witcher or Mass Effect where you're playing a pre-defined character, so you're supposed to play as Gerald of Rivia and not just some random monster slayer. But yeah, in a game where you have the chance to roleplay different arche types of character, like the diplomath, the warrior, the priest, wizard, what ever, a voiced protagonist can actually get in the way of the game, I mean a predefined voice will never replace your imagination. A certain type of character, like let us say a priest will sound very different to a warrior, in tone and with the used language, you can also not portray different accents or conditions, like a drunk player, a player who's faking something or what ever you get the picture. Not to mention it costs a hell lot of resources.
Izak
I Shot The ALBATROSS
I can't say I remember this, the only grievance I had with 3 and NV's dialogue system was the lack of low intelligence responses.
Not everyone , as I had no problem either. However there are to 'fix' the dialogue system this makes the box better so you don't have to scroll down. I didn't mean the whole system of it but i think quite a few wanted it changed so they could see all the options with out scrolling down
Izak
I Shot The ALBATROSS
I wouldn't say that was a problem deserving of an entire needless and hated overhaul, it sounds like more of a personal preference.
I don't think its was a 'hated overhaul' It was just I guess some people felt the box could of fit all the dialogue in or something. I think it was worth while to them players. What I suggest here is that FO4 could overused something similar to this dam overhaul with out having and completely rubbish system we got instead
Are you thinking about Darnified UI? If so, that was a complete UI font size overhaul that was needed due to FO3/FNV's UI having been optimized for console users. It wasn't just to fix dialogue.
Izak
I Shot The ALBATROSS
I meant the dialogue box of 3&NV being too small didn't warrant a total overhaul to the despised dialogue wheel of 4.
Well there are plenty of different mods that alter dialogue in someway I was thin king this though :
http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout3/mods/42/?
That just makes the dialogue box bigger but I am sure that mod your talking about does something similar
http://www.nexusmods.com/fallout3/mods/42/?
That just makes the dialogue box bigger but I am sure that mod your talking about does something similar
Of course i didn't at all in fact I much rather if they had of kept it similar to FNV/FO3 dialogue
Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
Thats been going on since oblivion. Ive recently played skyrim. For close to 100 hours and i think ive done at least 3/4 of the game yet there are people who spend 500 hours on a single character... On console! I dont know how they do it...
eissa
Artanis "Altáriel" Nerwen Nos Finwe
maybe people who have a demanding job in real life, and using bethesda game as relaxing and time waster..? that's why openworld sandbox is popular among newcomer.
Black Angel
Grand Inquisitor of the Ordo Hereticus
"Demanding job in real life", "relaxing and time waster", played Skyrim for 1000000000 hours, unmodded on top of that. I've seen people like that, some of them where middle/high-schooler.
I've played fallout 4 for about 6 days or something like that. I mean it one of the only games I have on xbox one and still do like it. Have't spent anytime on recently as been modding. I found that I spent lots of time just collecting junk to make settlements ect. Literally buildings settlements was all I would do in game and collect the junk for them. I didn't realize how shallow the story and stuff is ect. I din't get to diamound city intill like 4 days in. There are Quite alot of side quest to do as well some of witch are okay. The gun play and art style of the game is still good so it does feel good to play.
I was role playing leading the minutemen and building settlements and destroying enemy's bases. (Ignoreing preston). And that really sunk alot of time into the game. There are quite alot of small location in the game that are quite good with little small storys this is better than the actuall main quest line for sure.
I started the main quest again with another character siding with the brotherhood of steel and thats when i found the game stupid. I mean it was quite cool but the replay element was't there. If you're just do the botherhood quest you can finish the game pretty quickly and the game will get boring. It defintly does't have the replay value that fo3 or FNV has. There seems to be little to no role play. on FO3 i never racked as much time on one character but fo3 was a 'smaller game' map seize ect. But i did make tons of different role plays ect
I was role playing leading the minutemen and building settlements and destroying enemy's bases. (Ignoreing preston). And that really sunk alot of time into the game. There are quite alot of small location in the game that are quite good with little small storys this is better than the actuall main quest line for sure.
I started the main quest again with another character siding with the brotherhood of steel and thats when i found the game stupid. I mean it was quite cool but the replay element was't there. If you're just do the botherhood quest you can finish the game pretty quickly and the game will get boring. It defintly does't have the replay value that fo3 or FNV has. There seems to be little to no role play. on FO3 i never racked as much time on one character but fo3 was a 'smaller game' map seize ect. But i did make tons of different role plays ect
eissa
Artanis "Altáriel" Nerwen Nos Finwe
i respect some people decision to put a lot efffort into gaming thing, but it certain that not everyone is also the same. i myself were somekind between coregaming and hardcore gamer, but still find some fun with casual gaming like mmo. Fun is subjective