Agreed. That's precisely what we're trying to change, and that can never happen as long as stupid fan boys keep excusing Beth for it!

I actually think this is a great opportunity for Bethesda to earn more of my hard-earned cash.

If they added new quest branches to quests from the original game with every DLC along with new quests and regions I'd be all over that. Even if you only use the new quest branches in future play-throughs, it gives the game a lot of added replayability if every time you play it the main quest and guild quests become deeper and more complex.

"Remember that quest where you really wanted to do Z but we only let you choose X or Y? Well, now you can Z, too." I always seem to want to do something I'm not given an option to do. I think I just overthink things.

I agree, but I can see it both ways. On the one hand this has always been a weak point of TES and Bethesda should be going forward from Fallout 3, not backward. On the other hand, most branching dialogue amounts to "Evil choice" "Good choice" "Neutral choice" "Sarcastic/witty choice". There are a few points in some quest lines, particularly with certain shall we say underhanded guilds (coughthievescough) that the inclusion of full sentences without any opportunity for dialogue choice felt very, very forced because it was dealing with morality and Tamrielic religious issues that maybe my character doesn't necessarily agree with...but you have to select that option to move forward because...well there is no other option.

Skyrim basically has wiki dialogue only instead of single words, it's entire sentences. I actually prefer the Fallout 3 method OR the Morrowind/Oblivion method, one or the other, for exactly the reason I just gave. Skyrim's feels like a weird and awkward mashing of the two together :yes:

We don't vocalize our personality? So when we speak, we're all just objective robots with no semblance of subjectivity? When we speak, listeners can understand our motivations and beliefs based on what we say. But in Skyrim, with only one dialog choice in most circumstances, our characters are forced to act a certain way.

You're looking for the game to make these stories for you and I can understand the benefit of that, but there is nothing to stop you from doing what you spoke of. You can in nearly any fetch like quest just retrieve and sell the item, though the reward could be of more value. Better yet you can retrieve the item get the quest reward and then go back later and steal the item and sell it.

Point is, you can make your own story, something a more scripted game would not allow.

Actually in most cases the quest item will be marked as a "quest item" and not sell-able... only use is to turn it or take up room in inventory weighing you down. Actually another perfect example of the problem.

I made a thread about this when I first did this quest.

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1274041-innocence-lost-are-you-kidding-me-bethesda/

So yeah, there are quite a few people who think this quest (and others) don't give you all the choices they should give you.

Skyrim offers more varied choices when it comes to previous titles. In morrowind and oblivion most quests came down to do the quest according to what the npc said or don't do it at all. In skyrim i've seen many sidquests and some branching options in the MQ where you can ignore the quest, do it a way not spelled out for you or follow orders. Some have different outcomes and some are trivial but lead back to the same result. However it does allow you some leeway with what kind of character you are playing. There is a lot more replay value than in other titles.

Yeah, I did think it was wierd that I didn't get an option when I get to this part too. However, my character moves back and forth between neutral and lawful evil, so it wasn't that big of a deal to snuff out that evil hag.

However, for the holy warrior type, there is a way to make up for that kill by killing off an entire evil faction right after that.....

Some guy "hey can you find my fathers sword for me?"

Me "sure" *but im gonna stab you in the face with it when I do find it*


See, that wasn't so hard I see what you mean though, mass effect does this VERY well.

TES games have never had this really, though I feel like Skyrim does it better than previous ones. Try mucking around during a quest and sometimes interesting things happen. The only reason FO3 had more branching quests is because that is what the series is known for and FO3 actually had a lot less of that than the prior two games though FO:NV got back to their roots more.

All that being said, I would love to see more consequences for your decisions in TES games. Some sidequests make you do some fairly monumental things and the game world glosses over them like they never happened.

In a sense it's a lot subtler than the bioware idea:
Yes, I'll kill the monster for you! +10 goodie points
Only if you gimme cash! +500 cash
I'd rather kill you! +100 evil points

Unfortunately, far too often, Skyrim has this:
Yes, I'll the monster for you!
Only if you gimme cash [persuade]!
Gimme cash, or I won't do it [intimidate]!

Given the random NPC dialog sometimes, I have no idea whether 'intimidating' ever does anything bad, but the dialogs appear to be almost entirely pointless.

Obsidian Fallout 4 can get the branching dialogue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aViAxK3SKU

Bethesda is more like computer geeks with single path stuff SO NO BUGS (thanks btw guys), Obsidian has all the talent for multiple opportunities (but laid them off ; ; ) I love that chick who was into that one vault lol. Anyway, that's all I got peace

I know when people are complaining about a supposed lack of roleplaying potential in Skyrim that I can safely put myself in an entirely different category than the rest of this forum. That is just complete and utter nonsense to me, and I have to say, if you feel like you can't roleplay in Skyrim, then you just aren't trying. You just expect the game to hold your hand for your roleplay style, rather than to actually require you to do something about it yourself.

I'm pretty convinced Bethesda doesn't hire storywriters or have a dedicated dialogue team at all. Terrible failure.

If only we can get Bethesda to hire the Bioware developers to work with Todd's guys on the next game....just let Bioware focus on the branching quests and dialog options. Win.

The Thieves guild and Dark Brotherhood intro quests made me rage. Atleast make me able to say "No, piss off"...

Agreed.

No, non, no. Bioware is all talk and no actual consequence at all. Obsidian needs to be brought into the TES fold.

Uh, there is a very simple way to say "piss off" to the Dark Brotherhood without joining it. Things will get pretty blood though...get ready for one serious fight.

I agree to some extent, although I think multiple dialogue options can often give a very shallow illusion of choice. Sure, a lot of RPGs let you pick between blatantly obvious good and evil options, but you're still following fairly set paths if you want to proceed further.

For instance, I hate the shallow and gimmicky way Bioware handle dialogue.

I agree completely. I didn't want to be guild master. I thought Brynjolf should have been guild master and should have been the obvious choice.
1) Brynjolf, you belong as the guild master everyone trusts you
2) Why I'd love to be the guild master
3) Why don't we make it like the companions with just a harbinger, Brynjolf. You should be that

I found that the one line answers were ridiculous and poor writing and I'm an author. Dialogue is my forte. That was one of the things I really disliked about this game over other games. I also know someone who really didn't like this game because of the lack of choice in it. It may be open world but it is very quest linear.

OP liked DA2.

All that worthless dialogue, same exact ending errtime! What a good game.

Agreed on the Bioware part. Though I enjoy the older Bioware games (ME2 was ok for one playthrough of 15 hours but that's it and DA2 was an abomination) I would hate to see their type of dialogue in a Bethesda game. Really hate it. I prefer the current system a thousand times over that.

I could do with a few more options here and there and also with some flavor to dialogue. You rarely get to choose between more than 2 reactions to a quest (usually "I'd be honored" or "Good luck with that" types of responses). A few more wouldn't hurt, even if they lead to the same thing. As for more branches; it would be good in some cases but not like Fallout. In Fallout there are just way fewer quests because there are more branches. I prefer more quests which you choose to do or not to do, based on your character.

[EDIT]
Oh and some people don't seem to realise you can ALWAYS use TAB to exit dialogue if you feel it's heading somewhere you don't like. I do this quite a lot, actually. There's no need for a dialogue option to leave conversation, like a lot of other games offer. It just seems players don't realize (or want to realize) this and always click on dialogue to advance, but if the option is something my character would never say, I tab out and leave the NPC.
[/EDIT]

I agree with the linear quests, but this has always been the case with Elder Scrolls games. I do not agree with what you say about the dialogue however. Intimidate and Persuade are like the Paragon and Renegade choices in Mass Effect.