Alright, I know we've had our fair share of these since the reveal but I'm sure all the previous ones have been locked for post limit by now. I also think this one might be a little different, although I've not witnessed every single poll related to dialog since reveal.

I'd definitely like an option to show what will be said in it's entirety due to how strictly I play my characters personality wise, or in the very least some other way of indicating the tone of the reply. I remember there being a perk in one of the earlier Fallout games that would make replies a certain color depending on if they were agressive or not, even something like that would be okay.

Leave it as it is; its going to be good as it is.

I voted to leave as is.

I actually enjoy having a voiced protagonist in other games. But the old games didn't bother me that they were silent either.

If it bothers anyone that much... That's what mods are for ^^

Beth ought to stick to their guns and leave it as is. They knew early on that it would be controversial, and they shouldn't spend time adding a half-assed alternative for people who haven't even given it a try yet.

Should leave it as it is. We do not know how long some of the lines might be and if it was word for word that could be a pain for the UI to handle.

Just get rid of the dialogue wheel and I'll be happy.

Leave it alone...

What's there to "try" in voiced dialog?

The voice actor. The accuracy of the dialog options to what the character says. The amount of personality choices we can make. How much we think it adds to the emotional weight. The flow of conversations.

Hasn't the complaint always been not whether Brian can act out happy, angry, cruel, tender or cocky, but that regardless he will always sound like Brian? If the complaint is the existense of the voice, what would it matter how it works?

I don't see that it matters which choice they do... By doing it as it is, they reveal their hand, and show that it doesn't matter what the PC says; there will be no subtlety of language to detect, and it could just as well be a single word... Actually, it could just as well be the http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/Gizmojunk001/conversation_zpskxlbgapv.jpg from Oblivion.

The player will never really need to know what will be said; (only the loose gist).

*This is why the option to mute the PC voice, doesn't fix anything IMO.

**Actually I really liked the Oblivion mini game ~for what it was for. It was an elegant design to represent small talk for the purpose of influence ~the contents of which, were insignificant and made impossible to grow stale with repetition, as the conversation itself was abstracted to simply an event with no details.

But that's not good for primary dialog, unless the dialog is itself insignificant.

I'm personally fine with the voiced protag but I wouldn't mind if Beth included a traditional dialog option for the people who would like it better.

I wasn't aware that was always the complaint. Some people are miffed about the vague topics, or the "wheel" itself, or they're not sold on Delaney's performance yet; things that are common complaints in other games with voiced protagonists.

I have no idea how you could compare this to Oblivion's awkward speechcraft minigame.

I don't fathom why not, but I can equate it further with the dialog checks in the SSI gold box games, where the PC could respond to NPCs with "meek", "nice", "haughty", "sly". (Those being descriptors of their attitude and intent... but the words themselves were not important enough to even print.)

*WL2 copies this with their dialog skills, but prints the response.

Don't we all expect a "meek", "nice", "haughty", "sly" option from the FO4 PC (more or less)?

Or commonly a [Yes, No, maybe, Die!]

Certainly nothing par with Planescape.

First off, my main issue is the 4 options only, it will hurt important npc, face it the NPC you remember in a game is the ones with plenty of dialogue.

No they don't need to be important in the game, neither Moria or Alvor was important.

Yes you can get by it doing deep nested dialogues, however it will be clunky.

The new dialogue system will probably also be problematic on pc.

If your character says something else than you see it will feel stupid, problem here is more how its presented, as they wanted to show the dialogues in an an cross rather than an list you only get room for 3-4 words.

That your character speak outside of dialogues, well normal people rarely speak load unless they talk to somebody. Small talk with companions, Insults to enemies curses then trigger an trap is ok.

Worst case scenario we get an babbling idiot as many Skyrim NPC, fear is increased that character commenting is shown as an feature not some tiny thing.

In short dialogue is the only reason why I have not pre-ordered just to be done with it. Everything else looks good.

My main issue is that the PC can ignore anything, and walk away from it without a commitment.

*Totally taken back, if the NPC will curse out [and/or attack] the protagonist that walks away from them during a discussion they consider important.

My second issue is a flaw in the design, that allows the PC to carry on two (or more) conversations at once with nearby NPCs. That sounds like a minefield for dialog checks where each conversation can affect the PC's standing... Or it sounds like that might never matter from conversations.

I think they should implement something that spells out, word for word, what the PC is going to say with each selection. They can keep the current dialogue button mapping, but it should be a double input. Tap A to see the option, tap A again to confirm selection.

It's counter intuitive though because I'm never fond of hiding important information like that away :/

Perhaps the least intrusive is a minor delay. Hover on an option for three seconds or so, and it expands to the full text.

The way I understand the controls, there won't be hovering over an option. They fan it out to button prompts because it's just the activator; your crosshair becomes those options when you hover over the NPC you're talking to. Seems like they're adding multiple options to a lot of the world objects/actors we can interact with, instead of the old "Press [E] to activate" prompt. That's probably why they went with mapping the prompts to the face buttons, and it's why I never thought describing it as a "wheel" was accurate.

They could maybe have you hold down the button for a few seconds to show the full text without selecting it.

there seems to be this tendecy in the gaming industry to copy gamemechanics from other succesfukk games even if those game mechanics do not make that game the succes it is

also there is this evolution from open world rpg where you can go whereever you waznt whenever you want and be whoever you want , within the games limots toward what i call a interactice game movie where you as a player are only in there to shoot things and enjoy a endless parade of cinematic cutscenes

and than they still have the audacity of valling it a open world rpg

when tod said they opted for a voiced protagonist to give the players a better emotional band with their character i knew he was telling crap , a voiced protafonist does the exact opposite

many of you never did a real rpg or do not care about rpg games but a equal number of people do care about rpg games and if you hear your character say exactly the same lines with the same emotions mostly saying things you do not even want him to say , will completely and utterly destroy any ummersion and roleplay experience

nobody ever complained about the dialogue system in skyrim and i thought it was a greatway to satisfy both roleplayers and non roleplayers

You could leave dialogue at any time in Skyrim too and it worked without issues. Skyrim had one benefit in that it just added new topics on the topic list.

In Fallout 4 you have to rearrange the four options all the time and this is an error source, will it stay in the sub menu for days if you leave without finishing or will it return to the default after a minute or something?

It not as easy as it sounds as people will do stuff like solving an quest by accident while being in the dialogue about it.

For me, it doesn't really matter about dialogue wheels or full text. I always try to save before conversations because I tend to mess them up a lot. There have been plenty of past games where I misinterpret the intent or inflection of the answer I want to give. I'm trying to be happy go lucky and all of a sudden, the line I chose that I thought was the happy line, turns out to be scathingly sarcastic or angry. Sometimes you get a few choices that all seem rather wrong because you're reading of them is based on how you'd voice them and it becomes a guessing game. If I say something that I feel is out of character for the character I'm trying to portray.. I reload.

Leave it as it is. Give it a go. I think more people really should try these things in-game so they see more than a handful of short examples before passing judgement.

But hey, maybe I'm just strange because I don't want to criticise every tiny little detail from a company that has consistently provided me thousands of hours of entertainment without giving it a fair chance. It may turn out terrible, and damn right I'll give that feedback if it does, but I'm willing to give Bethesda the benefit of the doubt at this stage because despite previous errors they've still provided well over 50% of my game time in the last fifteen years.

Sorry you will get no poll entry from me. I hate prejudice and want to see first how this plays out, then I form a opinion about it. What Bethesda showed about story and dialoge was simply to little to form a opinion.

@gizmo

About walking away. Actually it's better as the constant annoying "later..." dialoge entry that doesn't deciede anything too and is in all previous Fallout games in one way or another.