Why, oh why do they take console players into consideration?

I'm joking ofcause.

But i see a lot of people talking about 'How having a voiced protagonist limits the interaction possibilities and that they've limited the talk menu to four options (a personal downer for me, seeing as i have no problems with operating a scroll-down menu.)

I have to admit that this is one of the few things that has made me a bit sad. Because Fallout originally was an RPG your talk options was plentiful and it would seem that Beth' are taking that particular part of it and streamlining it to better fit to the console systems. Which is a mistake in my mind, as it kinda degenerates the whole thing into just another crappy shooter game.

I have a problem with seeing anything good coming out of this.

So i ask you people: What could a possible benefit of this choice be?

We're all just talking in circles, wish Bethesda would give us something more to talk about.


Why don't you wait and see what the dialogue options are like before getting sad? Someone mentioned the possibility of a "more" option on 1 of the 4 options to expand your options.


I'm a little worried about dialogue but I can't really get too worked up til I actually see the game in more action in that regard, or play it.


Skyrim dialogue choice pretty much svcks and that's not limited to 4 items for consoles - sometimes you can only pick 2 different replies, or even 1 at times. Hopefully Fallout 4 is better than that.

Four options have been the general amount of dialogue options in Fallout games anyway. It's not like Elder Scrolls with its conversational lists.

As the TARDIS never takes the Doctor where he WANTS to go, merely where he needs to be, we may never get a game that let's us have the conversation options we want, but the one's we need to continue getting the ball rolling. And that is what is important.

For once, I think, Bethesda has gone for Quality over Quantity

How often was there dialogue options with more than 4 displayed at once? Its not like the conversation still can't branch into more choices when its called for. The upgrade for this game they are featuring is that there is not a dialogue screen you have to go into.

And on not knowing what the full text is ... if its not an option already in game ... modding a mouse over tool tip should be pretty easy.

Basically a button you press that activates a longer text window for what ever your mouse pointer is hovering over.

And on the voice acting , I'm sure there is options with that , like turning it off .

I'll bet with modding eventually we will be able to do something with that , or a third party program we can tweak how the voice sounds player side.

More often than not, the only dialogue options you had in the past two games boiled down to 'yes', 'no', 'tell me more', or 'change the subject', with occasional skill checks.

As has been pointed out many times, RPGs (and even visual novels and adventure games from Japan) have very few options during dialogue. Four options for any specific conversation is actually about right and may even be a bit high in the majority of cases. There are some exceptions here and there, sure, but four is a good average. RPGs do NOT require lots of options in dialogue and never have. Many RPGs such as Phantasy Star and Ys never had dialogue options even when they first began, yet they are considered some of the greatest classics of the genre. Western examples such as Pool of Radiance and other SSI "Gold Box" examples are the same. Even more recent examples like Mass Effect and Dragon Age hardly have more, or not much more.

90% of forum activity between announcement and release is talking in circles, misinformation, and huge unfounded assumptions.

Ok, so maybe four options is the standard.

Maybe it's just me that miss the more verbrose options in F1 & F2.

What i saw in the demo was all just so... small talky.

To be fair, all we really saw was going to be set in stone. You have to get into the vault, and Codsworth has to explain what happened.

What verbose options?

Generally you had two or three options, with others dependent of skill checks.

I think it was part of the humor in ye olde fallouts. And i liked it.

I'm still getting the game, though. it's not like i find it a game breaking flaw og anything like that.

I just worry that Bethesda is taking the game even further away from the RPG genre.

Yay for a terrible, terrible interface! Three options the first screen, two options for every subsequent screen (forward and back) until you get to the final screen so we have three again.

If the scene where Mr. 111 talks to Codsworth again after 200 years is any indication, I'm not sure we're getting either.

Yeah, that's why I said it'd be nice if we had something new to talk about. : )

And that's where Bethesda's craftiness puts into play (ironically this is an unfounded assumption hahaha):

They release their information, only bit by bit, so we speculate among ourselves and pull our hair or even breathe hardly waiting for them to release the game...

In short, they are doing that way to make us even more enthusiastic in waiting for the game to be released by only allowing us to guess what will come...

Again, this is just an assumption hahaha

What i am wondering, has anyone figured out how many lines of text dialogue that the PC had for either F3, or NV?

Surely we could extrapolate how 13,000 lines of dialogue would measure up to dialogue choices in either of the previous 2 FO games?

Fallout games have typically had far MORE dialogue options than TES games.

What quality?

Four buttons doesn't mean only four dialogue options. Larger conversation trees can easily be achieved through nested options where the initial choices are topics rather than dialogue choices, for example.