Opinions on Fallout 4?

[PossibleCabbage]

To be honest, I'm okay with a voiced protagonist... but the fucking Ass Erect styled dialogue wheel just kills it for me. I actually like to see what I'm going to say before I say it, so I can pick my choices instead of just having to guess.

The difference between a wheel and a list are just presentation. You can have exactly the same amount of information in either.

Like "there's a wheel instead of your list" and "the response you pick is not verbatim what you say" are unrelated issues. Ideally you could have a menu option (or at least this could be done with a mod) where the entire line of dialogue is visible before you choose it.

 

[Walpknut]

Well technically is jsut presentation but in Mass Effect they barely have more than 3 options at a time and they are all interchangeable. Now the difference between a Wheel, a list and a fucking Cross is huge, a cross only has four ends, that's as complex as it will get.

 

[Crni Vuk]

To be honest, I'm okay with a voiced protagonist... but the fucking Ass Erect styled dialogue wheel just kills it for me. I actually like to see what I'm going to say before I say it, so I can pick my choices instead of just having to guess.

The difference between a wheel and a list are just presentation. You can have exactly the same amount of information in either.

Like "there's a wheel instead of your list" and "the response you pick is not verbatim what you say" are unrelated issues. Ideally you could have a menu option (or at least this could be done with a mod) where the entire line of dialogue is visible before you choose it.

Are you shure?

There is really no way how to get something like that in a "dialogue wheel"

You could always argue that a wheel/cross could be designed in a way where it offers general answers and choices to expand it, offering sub-menues for nuances etc. But it would become so convoluted that you have to ask your self ... would a list with all the choices not be simply better, and more importantly FASTER for the player to use? Wheels work only well if you have very few choices.

Now I am not saying every game and dialogue has to be like that, but seriously, it isn't only about presentation. Those are design choices as well. For example when a company like Beth decides to make every character a voiced NPC or when a game like Ubisoft decides to go for the "dialogue" wheel than they chose visuals/graphics over gameplay. With voiced dialogues you have to limit the writing, voice actors cost money and there is only so much you can record before your budged is empty. And dialogue wheels sure look better and allow you for a more modern design compared to some list granted, but they can not contain as much choices like a list that is in nature a lot more open and allowing for much more elaborated answers by your player.

This all comes from the idea what a typical CRPG and ARPG should be like, where many stats can influence the answers you give. Has the player a high inteligence or whisdom? Is he a thief, warior, priest a druid or what ever other class the game offers. A Paladin would sure chose other answers and dealing with threats differently than a thief or bard. A list of dialogues gives you more chances to roleplay. Games like Deus Ex:HR or Mass Effect can be very engaging and extremly fun, I love Deus EX:HR. Particularly as the dialogues are good. But those games never ever allow you to roleplay anything else than Adam Jenson. It is a different kind of game with a more cinematic approach, which is alright, it sure doesn't have to mean that it's bad writing, but it is also very limited in the RPG part. It is one way to make a game, but not the only way and definitely not only about presentation.

I think it is fair to say that Fallout was always more leaning on the Plansecape torment side of games rather than the cinematic approach of Mass Effect or Deus Ex HR. Which has become like a "standart" in RPGs. Sadly a lot of the diversity gets lost that way, and it is left to kick starter campaigns and their teams to come up with games like Wasteland 2 or Obsidians Pillars of Eternity.

 

[TheAugmentedScyther]

>Dialogue wheel says "Doubt"
>think my character is going to say something along the lines of "I don't believe you"
>dialogue starts
>"You are full of shit, the truth is you hated that bitch. You followed her and dragged her onto your Brahmin and then took her out to the Vault. She woke up and you smashed her face in with a Power Fist. And then you stomped her. You stomped her because she's a drunken whore and she treated you like shit. You stomped her for all the years you had to take it. You stomped her because you are such a weak fucking sister and you wanted to erase all memory of it. Go on. Try to deny it"
>guy I'm talking to starts uncontrollably crying
>dialogue wheel gives me 4 new options
>want to console him because I didn't see it coming that my character would flip out like that
>pick [Glass Him] to give him a drink
>character picks up a nuka cola bottle and smashes his face in
>guy drags himself across the ground screaming for help
>chose dialogue option [Help Him]
>my character starts screaming "Oh I'll help you alright." walks up to him and stomps the shit out of his back and breaks his legs with a Super Sledge
>"+10 Renegade" pops up at the top of my screen and my character's face suddenly starts to look like a burn victim that went tanning
>Codsworth hovers over the guy and says some cheesy line along the lines of "Guess this will make BREAKING NEWS when they find his corpse"
>chose dialogue option "Very funny"
>character says "Fuck you"

 

[fred2]

snip

Initially you argued that FO4 intro backstory limits your control over your character, and thus is contrary to the idea of freedom in RPGs. I am familiar with sentiment toward playing blank slate characters, but having a past doesn't limit your freedom to interpret and develop your character as you want, "freedom" is about the journey and the impact you make through the game, while 'blank slates' is just another tool to makes us feel more invested.

I started off by pointing out that plenty of RPG's provided you with a backstory including PST and Alpha Protocol, two title that Chris Avellon (you probably know of him) worked on and characterised as having blank slates characters, despite them offering a well defined past. More specifically to our case, indeed FO:NV story structure is different and offers us little to no backstory (basally you srr the outsider), however, I argue that all the rest follow similar structure and come with personal stories, and that the single most notable difference between their intros is the extra details provided due to the transition to 3D. So for example if FO2 was made in 3d then you'd have seen a lot more of the tribal life, including the details you complained about here (like martial status and house decoration, ho no).

Now, assuming that you aren't actually beating on the transition to 3d dead horse and open minded, I left that video to offer some insight into the question you intially posed "what were they thinking?". Also consider that generally in plot heavy games where your character is newly introduced to the world, quite often your player character has a level of disconnect from main plot, which is doubly true for players new to the series (most were), which is one of the reasons why FO:NV wasn't received as well as FO3.

Anyway, what I am have been briefly hinting at is that Bethada knows exactly what they are doing (just as Obsidian did), in fact I think that FO3 and now FO4 intro, detailing life in the vault and pre-war, are spot on for the platform\mechanics, theme and target audience.

 

[Battlecross]

>Dialogue wheel says "Doubt"
>think my character is going to say something along the lines of "I don't believe you"
>dialogue starts
>"You are full of shit, the truth is you hated that bitch. You followed her and dragged her onto your Brahmin and then took her out to the Vault. She woke up and you smashed her face in with a Power Fist. And then you stomped her. You stomped her because she's a drunken whore and she treated you like shit. You stomped her for all the years you had to take it. You stomped her because you are such a weak fucking sister and you wanted to erase all memory of it. Go on. Try to deny it"
>guy I'm talking to starts uncontrollably crying
>dialogue wheel gives me 4 new options
>want to console him because I didn't see it coming that my character would flip out like that
>pick [Glass Him] to give him a drink
>character picks up a nuka cola bottle and smashes his face in
>guy drags himself across the ground screaming for help
>chose dialogue option [Help Him]
>my character starts screaming "Oh I'll help you alright." walks up to him and stomps the shit out of his back and breaks his legs with a Super Sledge
>"+10 Renegade" pops up at the top of my screen and my character's face suddenly starts to look like a burn victim that went tanning
>Codsworth hovers over the guy and says some cheesy line along the lines of "Guess this will make BREAKING NEWS when they find his corpse"
>chose dialogue option "Very funny"
>character says "Fuck you"

This is the second time I've seen this, glass him clearly means to cut someone. Where does it mean anything else?

Also L.A. Noire's issue was they apparently changed Accuse to Doubt hence why it's so off.

 

[naossano]

Fred2 >

The beginning is indeed important and we aren't wrong to spend time on it, but Fo3 fucked up the following even more than the beginning. Fo3 beginning featured events that were unrelated with you. You never chose your father or age in real-life. At the other hand, after leaving the vault, every choices that you made that weren't what the develloppers intended you to do was not or barelly aknowledged by the gameworld. IF you wanted the plots to make sense, the only option was to do exactly what Todd wanted you to do, as the opposite of what the IP usually do. Here Fo4 is also fucking up the beginning. Considering that beginning and how they fucked up the following in Fo3, the hopes are and should be low....

 

[Strawberry Fellow]

The thing i most hated about Fallout NV and 3 was that they really tried to make it a FPS over a RPG, NV now may be a little better than 3 in this aspect but the FPS is still their, that is why i am kind of scared of what their going to do in 4, in my opinion the best Fallout game was the first and possibly second because it played like a RPG and felt like one. With Fallout 4 their really pushing the FPS aspect of it like making V.A.T.S slow down time and making less useful, also dont get me started on the choices in 3 an NV, in 3 one of my charcters was a BIG Enclave supporter and i wanted him to join them, guess what i coudent, their are many other choices that were not their and im pissed off about. Oh god only if Bethesda could let Interplay remake Fallout 1 and 2 or tactics, please.

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

snip

Sadly that is true. Now don't get me wrong, I love FNV and it will be one of those titles that will remain on my current PC and future PCs in the future (along with Deus Ex 1, Star Trek 25th Anniversary/Judgment Rites, ST Bridge Commander), but it is primarily a shooter and suffers in other parts because it has to build up on the FO3 engine (I still think location spaces on a map would be much better than a large map with all locations on it).
Obsidian did a great job on overcoming the limitations but they could do only so much in the given time.

And now Fallout 4 seems like Fallout 3 done times 10, even more wide open pointless terrain, loot caverns, critters to kill for the sake of killing, and little to no context at all.
I much rather have a smaller but well consistent and properly filled up game instead; interesting characters and locations, fun quests, good story telling, challenging but well balanced gameplay that allows for various approaches on solving quests.

 

[fred2]

I still think location spaces on a map would be much better than a large map with all locations on it

Same here, I am so tired of Open world games... I'd would rather have something like DeusEx or Dishonored ( also under wing of Bethesda).

I much rather have a smaller but well consistent and properly filled up game instead; interesting characters and locations, fun quests, good story telling, challenging but well balanced gameplay that allows for various approaches on solving quests.

Indeed. Btw, I really enjoyed Dishonored. It has distinctive style, great atmosphere and level design, while ostensibly its what some call a "corridor shooter" its layout offers a measure of verity allowing you different ways to explore the game world. Also while an aRPG, it is focused on stealth, with nice characters and Silent Protagonist. And speaking of aRPGs IMO Deus Ex's character progression system of weapons and equipment, skill points, and augmentations was far better then what Beth implemented for FO3.

 

[Nas92]

For me the voiced protagonist and the dialogue wheel are total dealbreakers. Even if the writing turned out to be a whole lot better than that of Fallout 3's, even if the RPG mechanics and the in-game options allowed for a wide variety of characters I would still only buy it on a 95% sale. And since what I've mentioned probably won't happen I'm only going to watch LPs of this game.

 

[Moosick]

Btw, I really enjoyed Dishonored. It has distinctive style, great atmosphere and level design, while ostensibly its what some call a "corridor shooter" its layout offers a measure of verity allowing you different ways to explore the game world.

honestly, you're better off playing Thief 2 because Dishonored is basically that, with plasmids and a worse storyline. Not that it isn't a competent game but it's so derivative and simplified in mechanics and aesthetics that it's very meh compared to its inspiration, as well as having a real pretense about being a stealth game, telling you off for using overt, lethal techniques whilst giving you an arsenal capable of taking down Frank Horrigan.

 

[TorontoReign]

Eh? Dishonored wasn't a bad game. The old Thief games may be superior in some ways, but Dishonored did a lot of things right. It helps if you don't consider it a stealth focused game.

 

[Moosick]

Never said it was bad, strictly speaking. It's reasonably competent but everything exciting/the things they got right about it are either stolen from Thief, a vague variation on a couple of mana powers, or improved swordfighting, which is rendered pretty irrelevant when you have the crossbow of death. And they pretty much scream the stealth route. Asides from the stealth tutorial, the stealth-based enemy awareness markers, the stealth-based rewards, there's also the whole punishing you for killing folks/getting caught with an absurd and broken moral system, all the while giving you a huge arsenal of killing machines. While you're supposed to be showing you're the good guy trying to save Emily.

It's got no focus, and makes large expansive maps with lots of collectables for upgrades, which only distract you from the mission, making what would be focused, story supporting missions have about as much direction as the flying pattern of a cranefly, unless you never equip the heart and just steamroll your way to the intrusive objective markers (as opposed to thief, which has large and varied maps, but never gets to unnecessary backtracking and crossing the entire map, and allows it to support the mission you're on, and besides, you're an assassin, your job is literally to be in and out as fast as possible in as little time as possible, very much like sex). It's good by the AAA industry's standards but that's not saying much. It's fairly fun on the first playthrough, but as an actual creative work where the story and world is a significant element (and the story is pretty good, rather memorable bar the obvious betrayal), it has too many faults to be anything above 'good enough'. It tries to cater to too many audiences and sacrifices the plot and the gameplay that is supposed to inform and support that plot. It has so much potential to be a good, modern stealth-defining game, but it fails due to it's lack of focus and attention to detail. But I am judging it there from the perspective of art criticism. As a bit of tactical fun it's a definite go-to in my library.

/offtopicminireviewsorry._.

 

[Walpknut]

I actually liked that they punished for killing everyone, I think is one of the better aspects of Dishonored. If yo uare just spreading chaos and creating more corpses for the rats to feed, your entire Coup is not gonna make any good for Dunwall.

 

[Gizmojunk]

THere is a different betwen Retro futurism and just making it the 50's with robots, specially because Previous Fallout games had never implied they never went past the 50's in culture, they weren't listenning to 50's music in the 2077, there are even references to Glam Rock, the Hippie movement and a lot of other things, Bethesda seems to have taken the "Retro" part of the setting and handle it with the subtlety and grace of a brick to the face.

Bethesda has made crap of it, with a deliberate elevator pitch mentality to their utter simplification of the series setting. Instead of the future they had envisioned in the past, and all that entails. Bethesda has retconned it all as effectively the future in the past; because it's easier for those unfamiliar with the series to "get" it. I've seen game reviewers that thought FO3 was set in the 1950s.

They ignore anything inconvenient to their warped revisionary treatment of the IP; and use everything else in it ~regardless if it makes sense to or not... hence the bottlecaps and Enclave, and FEV reuse.

 

[fred2]

THere is a different betwen Retro futurism and just making it the 50's with robots, specially because Previous Fallout games had never implied they never went past the 50's in culture, they weren't listenning to 50's music in the 2077, there are even references to Glam Rock, the Hippie movement and a lot of other things, Bethesda seems to have taken the "Retro" part of the setting and handle it with the subtlety and grace of a brick to the face.

Retro futurism usually involve the assumption that social values will be the same in the future, being able to contrast those with our own is part of its charm. But if fallout went past the 50's as you suggest, then why do we have all those pinup girls, or individuals with 50s mind set in the originals.

Actually for the sake of the argument, if you were the director on Fallout project what music would you have put on the radio and how would you decorate the pre-war interiors? maybe a black president?

 

[TorontoReign]

THere is a different betwen Retro futurism and just making it the 50's with robots, specially because Previous Fallout games had never implied they never went past the 50's in culture, they weren't listenning to 50's music in the 2077, there are even references to Glam Rock, the Hippie movement and a lot of other things, Bethesda seems to have taken the "Retro" part of the setting and handle it with the subtlety and grace of a brick to the face.

Actually for the sake of the argument, if you were the director on Fallout project what music would you have put on the radio and how would you decorate the pre-war interiors? maybe a black president?

For one why does there need to be a radio?

 

[Walpknut]

Music wise to me, priority number 1 would be to get some memorable ambient music first.
If I were designing a Fallout game I would actually go for Post war music if there needs to be a radio, maybe do something like what the Radio Free Wasteland mod does with the "Raider Station" and look into experimental music influenced by older trends, like Psychobilly and such. Maybe even have some random shit like a crazy dude with one of those homemade radios broadcasting electronic music he makes with an improvised Theremin made out of old pieces of technology and such.

 

[TorontoReign]

I use the radio a bit myself but before Fallout 3 it was never something I felt should be required. I always preferred ambient music like in Fallout 1 and 2.