4356 réponses à ce sujet

[MisterJB]

I can't help but feel that Bethesda shot itself on the foot by making the PC someone from the Old World, presumably.

 

If they don't explore that to its fullest (and I doubt their writers are talented enough for that), then what was the point? We know how things were, we have to have knowledge unavailable to anyone else. Theoretically, we should be able to even provide a perspective not seen in the Wasteland for a long time. We effectivelly are the Old World.

 

Except for the Ghouls. Many of them were born in the Old World too.

 

So, if they ignore our origins, it makes them look lazy and uninspired.

If they present the notion we're very important because we remember the Old World, it clashes with the lore.

[Fast Jimmy]

I look forward to playing as Jesus.

Hey Zeus! How's it going?

[Liamv2]

Hey Zeus! How's it going?

 

Ewwww. They better not do that. If they do i'll call my protagonist **** me.

[Fast Jimmy]

Ewwww. They better not do that. If they do i'll call my protagonist **** me.

Well, Hey Zeus and Mohammad are both more common names than John worldwide.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Hey Zeus! How's it going?

 

Hera give us strength!

[Fast Jimmy]

I'll just wait and see. The fact that the protagonist has over 13,000 lines and took two years for them to record impresses me enough. It sounds like they went balls out. And that's just one character.

13,000 is not a lot. I mean, it IS... but not in terms of a multi-gender voiced RPG protagonist. Your average Bioware game has upwards of 40 or 50K. Geralt in TW3 has 70K. If those are your measuring sticks of voices protagonist, you probably aren't going to be impressed with FO4

EDIT: hold the phone, I may be comparing total lines of dialogue for TW3 to the protagonist-only lines of FO4.

EDIT2: Well, TW3 number is correct, at least.

https://m.reddit.com...dio_recordings/

So less than a fifth of TW3's voice acting... spread across two genders.

[Fast Jimmy]

13,000 for each gender.

I haven't played TW3 yet, so I can't judge. I own it... just only did the opening and decided to hold off for awhile.

ME3 had 40k TOTAL. Not just Shepard. ME1 and ME2 had around 20k.

Fair enough... but I'd say they didn't go "balls out" or anything of the sort. And given that one of the coolest things I found about Fallout was its different dialogue options based on skills, that is very disheartening that this may be a thing of the past.

[Akrabra]

In the E3 demo you had a dialogue option that was yellowed out and the PC couldn't press it. It was probably a speech-check/Special check so i am pretty sure they are returning. 13k lines was just at E3 though, Todd Howard said that would record more over the next few months. It seems like they atleast committed to it, if it is going to be good or not, we'll wait and see.

[Fast Jimmy]

That's definitely balls out.....When it takes two years for an actor to finish their sessions. When the protagonist is already a quarter the size of Mass Effect 3's total number of lines.

As for different dialogue skills, I don't see why that can't happen again. You seem to think you can't fit that in among the thousands of other lines.

I do seem to think that because it seems quite likely.

They might have dialogue options to the level of Fallout 3, but nothing near what they had for NV (the much superior game, to my tastes).

[MisterJB]

Different dialogue options based on skills is a must.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

New Vegas would have looked completely different if they had such a bad view of Bethesda's work.

What? I won't get bogged into the successor arguments but this doesn't make sense at all. Bethesda contracted Obsidian to make New Vegas. Bethesda owns the IP and bankrolled the project. If Bethesda wanted it to be like a Fallout 3 spinoff, then that's what it would be. If Bethesda wanted an isometric turn based game from Obsidian, that's what it would be.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Anyways, I like NV better myself, but I'm getting tired of hearing about them being completely different or something.

They're thematically quite different, even if mechanically quite similar. KotOR 1 and KotOR 2 is also a good example of this.

Of course Obsidian were happy to work on Fallout, Avellone and Sawyer are pretty much Fallout fanboys. But they are different games in the sense that their design and narrative philosophies differed. One way I'd put it is that Bethesda focuses on environmental exploration, using characters and quests as a means of taking the player from setpiece to setpiece. It's like a themepark. Whereas Obsidian focused on factions and ideologies first and foremost, using characters and locales to drive home the themes and narrative tones they wanted to establish.

Fallout as a series is based on the latter, not the former. The former method is a big money maker for Bethesda (just look at Skyrim) so it's not like I expect them to try the latter (which makes the noted changes for F4 even more confusing) but simply put, Bethesda doesn't understand the Fallout franchise. That's not to say they'll make a bad game, it's just that Fallout is a series fundamentally about society whereas Bethesda have shown that they think Fallout is about the player.

One of these days, I will channel my autism and actually explain "Bethesda doesn't get Fallout" in un-necessary detail and just link back to it from that point. But until I have the time and inclination to write a digital monument to my pathetic grognard inner nature, you'll just have to take my word for it.

[Akrabra]

They don't get Fallout, but they own Fallout and they have been working on the series longer than the original developers. When i put it like that, it sounds weird. Then again i get what you mean. Ofc Obsidian would be more true to the Fallout lore and style, they had members that worked on the original games. 

 

I think Bethesda made the right choice about centering the story on the East Coast and just do a very few hints on the Original lore and then build something of their own. It means the games are connected, but also seperated. I am glad that Fallout 3 came out to be honest, i don't think i would have discovered the series without it, and many thousands can say the game. Gave me an oppurtunity to play the other games aswell. 

[Iakus]

I can't help but feel that Bethesda shot itself on the foot by making the PC someone from the Old World, presumably.

 

If they don't explore that to its fullest (and I doubt their writers are talented enough for that), then what was the point? We know how things were, we have to have knowledge unavailable to anyone else. Theoretically, we should be able to even provide a perspective not seen in the Wasteland for a long time. We effectivelly are the Old World.

 

Except for the Ghouls. Many of them were born in the Old World too.

 

So, if they ignore our origins, it makes them look lazy and uninspired.

If they present the notion we're very important because we remember the Old World, it clashes with the lore.

 

Possibility:  We not only play as an android, but all our memories of the Old World are faked.

 

THere was never a spouse or a child.  Codsworth is in on it, and is monitoring your reactions for The Institute.

[Fast Jimmy]

Possibility: We not only play as an android, but all our memories of the Old World are faked.

THere was never a spouse or a child. Codsworth is in on it, and is monitoring your reactions for The Institute.

Pretty much. This is my diehard hope to help swallow the pill of forced background and character that Bethesda is giving us.

[Iakus]

Pretty much. This is my diehard hope to help swallow the pill of forced background and character that Bethesda is giving us.

Understandable.  But personally I'd hate to be forced to play as an android.

[MisterJB]

Understandable.  But personally I'd hate to be forced to play as an android.

 

Which is why I believe that the prologue being a simulation is more likely.

It's still a twist but a safer one that doesn't fundamentally alter your character down to the biology.
 

[Akrabra]

There is one thing i don't understand though, everyone is screaming about the forced background. Yet every Fallout game has a set story for the Protagonist and motivation for them. On the Bethesda forum it is refered to as Anti-roleplay, but they believe it is TES. Isn't this just Bethesda beeing true to the formula and taking it abit further?

[Fast Jimmy]

There is one thing i don't understand though, everyone is screaming about the forced background. Yet every Fallout game has a set story for the Protagonist and motivation for them. On the Bethesda forum it is refered to as Anti-roleplay, but they believe it is TES. Isn't this just Bethesda beeing true to the formula and taking it abit further?

Taking it a bit further is the part that's tricky.

Previous Fallout games give a set background of being a Vault Dweller, a tribesman, a courier... but it never gave you - never FORCED you - to have emotional attachments to any of it. You could have the mindset of "screw the Vault and everything it stood for, I'm off to explore the world and do things my way." Theres dialogue options to reflect exactly this.

If you are married to someone, you imply both familiarity and at least tacit approval of them. Same for having a child - we are given a character that is provided forced emotional bonds and desires. The player is not free to decide what is important and what is not, but rather has to take the "I want to find/save my spouse and child."

That's fine in a game with little player agency that wants to tell a story... but it works against be idea of creating your own character to explore the world, which is where Bethesda's strengths really lie.

[Sully13]

We will see when it comes out.