I think you can just say NV is a bad Beth's FO3 spin-off because while both used the same engine and shared many assets, NV don't have the same main focus as Beth's FO3 or any other Bethesda games.
Sometimes, shorter is better.
Sometimes... but it's rare that the short the concise statement gets fully absorbed as expected, and without misunderstandings. Longer form can nip some of this in the bud, by reiteration. So long as you break up the post into paragraphs, it usually poses no problem for it's length.
But in Beth's FO3 the same speech option is always exists no matter how high is MC's speech skill and more point into speech only change the %...
That's the idea—so long as it actually uses those numbers.
I never liked that FO3 labeled the skill & attribute checks. However... If the game is to offer a dialog option—and have it inconsistently fail or succeed, then it should inform the player what determines the outcome.
At first glance, I'd —
think— that I would prefer it if the game silently did the checks during conversation... But in practice (depending upon implementation), it would either be that the same statement mysteriously yielded different outcomes for different (unlabeled) skill levels, or that skill checks would create new dialog options that would be
guaranteed to fail or succeed, depending on the skill roll that generated them. Neither option seems good to me.
while NV's threshold based do have its problems, it's still more ideal for role playing. Like, a person without any medical training shouldn't be able to say the same thing in the same situation as a trained surgeon, the threshold in NV simply is to define if your character is skillful enough for it or not, not the best way to handle it but still better.
Thresholds (as a rule), produce infallible characters that either always succeed or always fail; with no middle ground. IMO that is decidedly
not good for roleplaying. This means that the expert never—ever makes a mistake, regardless of circumstance; and that the novice never—ever has an epiphany or a lucky break from circumstance.
This doesn't imply that the PC can con a surgeon into accepting them as a colleague—with knowledge they don't have. It implies that the knowledge they have was enough in that circumstance.
**That circumstance could even be that the surgeon has a migraine, or that they are distracted, and want to be somewhere else.[/QUOTE]
I do agree there should be a middle ground, like certain option can be unlocked after MC have enough point in certain skill but still have chance to fail if MC is not skillful enough.
Come to think of it, isn't that how Fallout 1 & 2 works?
Not exactly, but weighted percentile skills can sometimes work better with an added penalty system; where certain situations impose a sharper difficulty—while still remaining possible. Like a security door that is resistant against lock picking.
Fallout had skill proficiency maximums above 100%. The way this worked is that certain situations imposed a flat difficulty penalty shaved off of the maximum skill level. For a novice, that might drop their skill to 5%, while for an expert that same penalty might still leave them with a 95% chance of success; or perhaps 85%. (Both could make a mistake and fail, but it is far, far more likely to be the novice.)
** IRRC (but I'm not certain off hand), I do think that Fallout 2 had a fixed threshold for choosing Skynet's brain; that you had to have a certain level of skill to get additional choices.
______
By your logic, Fallout 3 would be the spin-off here...
That
is my logic; I said so in the post. (...and for the very reasons you cite.
)
I never use the 'By your logic' tac, because it is so often used as a bludgeon by someone who doesn't understand that logic; and I won't put myself in that situation, and be —that guy.
You regard 3 as the sequel and NV as the spin-off when 3 doesn't bend to the Fallout 1 and 2 roots and 'further or expand' those games.
No I do not; (see above).
NV is a sequel, just like Fallout 3. They both happen after the events of the game before them.
Is the film 'Spy Kids' a sequel, or prequel to the film Machete?
The both feature
the same character, and presumably one happens before or after the other.
The Sitcoms have spin-offs; they rarely have sequels. The show Frasier included cast members and characters from Cheers, and took place after Frasier moved to a different city. It clearly takes place after Cheers (because it has guest appearances of Cheers' characters), but it's not a sequel.
The Fallout IP has other games in it; They all take place after the great war, and have common factions... yet they are not sequels.
The aforementioned Dawn of War, and Spacemarine games, are both set in the Warhammer universe. Warhammer has a timeline of events. Would that make any Warhammer game a sequel to any other that was set before it?
—Rhetorical; of course not.
