Gripes about the writing

No, but you gotta take these things into account before you go all out bashing the game.

 

no, no we don't. We are consumers, we don't have a stake in a coporate entity. Therefore, we can make whatever opinion we like about fallout 3. Be it a good or an amazing game, its irrelevant to me how big or small a company is, plus bethesda makes a ton of money, and its really not that hard to just have some unvoiced dialogue.

They made the choice to fail horribly at it, and the lack of care is hugely evident as a result.

 

Yeah. Ignore the valid points. It's the best outcome I could expect from this place, I guess.

 

Pot, kettle, black, etc.

 

And that is the fucking essence of the problem. The voice acting is accomplishable by any means in our times but the thing is not to overuse it. I understand dubbing the characters in action games, because you don't have the time nor pleasure to read the subtitles while unloading your ordnance on those villains. Such productions exist only to provide quick but effective entertainment without the need of using deep dialogue trees. But to dub rpg games where immersion is the key? When it's done this way then I lose the element of imagining what kind of voice the character has, not mentioning the number of dialogue lines being automatically cut down from thousands to hundreds for the sake of budget. Also, the voice acting is often terrible and rarely even suits to npc. The same with visuals. When they're to detailed I'm given the world as it is, with not being able to run the cogs of my imagination. And I assure you, none of the producers is, and ever will be able, to model out such variety of different chairs that I'm able to think about. And I can imagine a lot.
Of course, even if an rpg is fully voice acted and the dialogue is shallow, there is no fucking excuse for making it so retarded as it's in Fallout 3.

 

Who is talking? Pablo? Or his dog?

I just went back 10 years in time in my minde. That spiritual journey, combined with your outmost intelligent post, made me smile.

Thank you.

 

I really don't understand your arguments. That's like arguing "You have to understand! They couldn't make a good game, they have to pay everybody for all that extra work that would require. They made a game, didn't they?"

Nobody forces you to spend your time reading and posting here.

 

There was voice acting in Fallout 1 and Fallout 2.

The two that stand out to me are Harold, and Marcus. Harold's voice actor is someone that escapes me, but I remember when he talked for the first time, I was actually quite surprised and amazed. The voice acting was... well, it was good. Same for Marcus, they had the guy who played Worf in Star Trek doing his voice. It was very good. Usually you only find good voice acting in, well, Japan, heh.

The voices were unique to the characters, you had voices that stood out, like Shaloob or whatever playing Aradesh. I can still remember all of them, because they were impressive, and you know what? It wasn't overbearing either. With Fallout 3 I hear Simm's voice everywhere I go, because how many characters did the same voice actor play? I don't know. All of them? Who the hell knows? All I know is, everyone sounds the same, and that's annoying as hell.

 

Quality voice overs in a game at a minimum require good writing, good acting, and good direction. All these things are needed. If you can't provide good acting or direction then shitcan everything except the important character parts.

 

ROFL

Sorry for Spam but that story needed to be quoted. Is there a copyright on?

 

Not to mention that taking time to actually learn that piece of info by talking to said guards netted you some xp. FO3 is sorely lacking in any chance to garner xp except through the unmitigated slaughter of just about everyone / thing you meet. Hell, even the completion of some minor "quests" (if you can call them that) often get you nothing but a kharma shift.

 

It's been mentioned already, but generally the dialogue in Fallout 3 wasn't bad. It wasn't as good as the dialogue in the previous Fallouts (which was generally good but inconsistent at times because there was more than one writer) and I don't think it was as well-acted. The big problem, though, is the player's dialogue. Many of the questions and responses you were provided with seriously made you sound like a dumbass.

Also, %check options were terrible in FO3.

 

You didn't play the game, did you? Cause your statement as a whole is utterly wrong. My first evil character now being level 5 has actually gained more experience by pickpocketing, disarming mines, lock picking and other non-violent stuff (exploring gives EXP either).

Go and play the gem....eh...game already!

 

quant is correct. Things such as successfully passing dialogue checks can net you some EXP, even if the vast majority of EXP earned is likely to be through the game's mostly unavoidable combat.

 

Level 5 without killing? You sure must have too much time?

And whats that..copyright thing?!

 

Not to piss anyone off, but I thought this thread's about the writing? The Fallout 3 review that's posted up on NMA has the best quote about the problem with the writing,

“Dialogue wasn't a battle we wanted to pick. There were other things that were more important for us to spend time and energy on… we just don't have unlimited monkeys and typewriters.” -Pete Hines.

Also, "Violence done well is fucking hilarious." -Todd Howard

So let me get this straight, you gave us shitty death animations for shittier dialogue? Hell, sign me up for decent dialogue over piss poor rag doll death animations.

 

I did never say such a thing. Read THEN comment.

Thanks. It's mine now.