Fallout 4 announced with teaser trailer

[VxdVxn]

In response to post #25831584. #25839434, #25848009 are all replies on the same post.

Immo82 wrote: After reading these comments I have a feeling that Fallout 4 will suck big time. I bet they won't care one bit about what the fans want, they're just gonna make a Fallout version of mass effect mixed with CoD or some s#*! like that... Atleast I still have Torment - Tides of Numenera to look forward to.

lucastimothy wrote: I respect your opinion, but frankly disagree.

Bethesda Softworks has been working on Fallout 4 since Skyrim's release, which is almost 5 years now. Todd Howard stated and I quote, "We know what this game means to everyone," said Howard. "The time and technology have allowed us to be more ambitious than ever. We've never been more excited about a game, and we can't wait to share it." Bethesda has been known for releasing extremely well-made games that were ultimately a huge success; ie. Skyrim, Oblivion, Fallout 3, etc. In general, their track record is clean, except for having multiple glitches in their larger titles. Their last Fallout game was Fallout 3 as Obsidian worked on Fallout: New Vegas, and Todd as well as Bethesda realises their Fallout fanbase: I seriously doubt they would work this long and hard on a rather disappointing title. Most of these "comments" are pure speculation and rumours: the ONLY thing that is confirmed is everything you see in the official trailer, anything else, at all, is here-say or *cough* "educated" (if that word is appropriate) guesses.

djhater wrote: Fallout 3 iz teh best game evar! Todd Howard Rulez!!!!
I spent "1,000,000" hours collecting lootz and "exploring" the huge open worldz cuz the story was the best evar!!!!!!!!
I loooove talking to all the awesome characterz in teh game
nneedz more greeeen colors

I only wish xzibit could put fallout in my fallout so i could fallout whle fallouting. best itz teh best game evar...
GOTY.....Skyrim rulez..

I dont really have 'high' hopes either. Seems big companies like to hype up their games and only few actually live up to them, I guess we shall see when Beth releases FO4 whether or not they knew what this game means to us.

BTW Skyrim was unplayable for me so naturally I hated it, Oblivion was ok but the gameplay was dreadful and Skyrim was only a small upgrade from that, FO3 I must admit I loved it but they lacked a lot of the humor from the original Fallouts... the dialog was garbage while Liam Nelson was amazeballs.

The only reason Bethesda games are so successful is because of the mods... without them the games really wouldn't be that great.

[JianXintou]

In response to post #25832509. #25832534, #25832994, #25833799, #25833889, #25845579, #25848864 are all replies on the same post.

digitaltrucker wrote: Do any of you who are actually familiar with the Fallout franchise (or for that matter TES) truly believe that Bethesda would limit the player to a specific gender? That would be such a massive reversal of their traditional gameplay that it's frankly unbelievable. I don't buy it.

frogzilla98 wrote: +11111111111111111111111111

Lisnpuppy wrote: I said as everyone can see, "If it is true..." I don't know if it is true yet.

However I have seen big developers take what I felt is a step in the wrong direction. Let us look at Bioware/EA with the Dragon Age games. Each one became less moddable and limited your choices more each game.

If they want to write a game with a specific PC in mind for a story...that is their prerogative. I'm not even saying it CAN'T be good. I just would not be interested in RPGs that limit choice and ignore what has been happening in gaming. Women are gamers. It is impossible to deny that the 18-30 demographic white male gamer is no longer completely accurate.

The writing of the game, how good the game is, how well-done and bug-free *cough* a game is made is obviously the most important thing. But you can have all these things and more and give gamers a choice when making RPGs. After all...it stands for role playing right? Not much of role playing when even the gender option is removed.

I will wait to see what is confirmed. I am not saying I believe things..which again is why I said "IF" it is true. It would not, however, shock me in the least.

Traditionalfire wrote: http://kotaku.com/latest-popular-fallout-4-rumor-sure-seems-like-bs-1709009561

Of course they won't

Traditionalfire wrote: When it comes to character creation, DA: Inquisition has the most options for creating a character out of all the games. You can't choose your intro thing sure but you have a ton of options when it comes to character design.

jim_uk wrote: @digitaltrucker I'm very familiar with the franchise, I've played all of the games, I'm also familiar with Bethesda and their record of removing important things every time they release a game. I really hope that Reddit post is a load of BS but I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't.

janishewski wrote: I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down.

"I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down."
I somewhat agree with this. I honestly couldn't even remember without some serious thinking which features Beth has removed from past games. And particularly for Fallout we can't really argue that they removed crucial features from FO1/2 - there's just too much of a gap for that argument to make sense.

[CRBASF23]

In response to post #25824664. #25824914, #25825809, #25825919, #25826019, #25826209, #25826354, #25826574, #25828999, #25830289, #25830979, #25831614, #25832299, #25832644 are all replies on the same post.

Lisnpuppy wrote:

 

In response to post #25824069.

znancekivell wrote: Excellent.

In fact, I have only a single complaint about the whole trailer.

We all know that Fallout 4 will ( or should! ) let us choose which gender we want to be, so as far as the actual game is concerned this is a moot point, but I am disappointed that Bethesda chose ( yet again! ) a male stand-in for the PC instead of a female wanderer. I really am becoming utterly sick of all these Caucasian males running around in video games, and I would prefer to see some actual variety in the spice of nuclear apocalyptic life.

Love the dog, by the way. Wo/Man's best friend!

If rumours are correct there is no female player character, that's going to piss some people off, as for dudes in nearly every game...



Contains strong language.

 

 

If that is true...(and I hope to the internet deities that Bethesda has learned players want MORE choices and not less) then that may actually be a deal breaker for me. That is going backwards. The last two games you could play as female so it makes little sense why you would not be able to do so now.

 

It wouldn't even be totally about the fact I am female...it is at the end, choice. Bethesda seems to narrow games more and more with each one. I don't care how pretty the graphics are or if the game has drivable cars. Let me have at least a semblance of choice and be able to choose male or female.

 

With everything that has taken place in the past few years regarding women's place in gaming I would think that in a title that is looked forward to by so many that gender choice would be a no-brainer. I would smack of lazy and that Bethesda has had its fingers in the ears and are loudly singing "la la la la la can't hear you la la la."

jim_uk wrote: This woman was mocked at the time but so far what she's said has been on the money https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/28v2dn/i_played_fallout_4 not just the date and location but if you check out of the developer making the spin off you'll find they're a Bethesda partner and looking to hire people with Gamebryo/id Tech experience. If the post in genuine then it's not looking good for those who want choices.

Darkspazz wrote: Good lord everyone chill out, They already hired voice actors for both the male and female character, You'll be able to play as a girl. Can y'all stop circle jerking nonsense?

SMB92 wrote: Can you back that, Darkspazz, with say, some EVIDENCE :/

Back to the topic, I don't particularly feel comfortable with having a "gender change" at the end of the story, in fact if at all. I always play my character as "Trinity" from the Matrix, this would piss me off severely. And hopefully that woman from reddit isn't joking about a new engine + map size, let's hope it's moddable. With all this talk of cutting everything else, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't. But then, they'd probably want to charge wouldn't they?

JianXintou wrote: Are there any sources for these supposed VAs?

The reddit post above may not be 100% accurate but doesn't seem too far off, either.

CRBASF23 wrote: If we was really the person who leaked the information to Kotaku, why in the Kotaku article it says that they called for both Male and Female actors, when in her reddit post says you can only play as Male?

CRBASF23 wrote: Kotaku the supposed magazine which the woman leaked the info to, in it's article said that they had a casting call for both male and female VA's: http://kotaku.com/leaked-documents-reveal-that-fallout-4-is-real-set-in-1481322956

jim_uk wrote: Try reading the Reddit post, it says you can switch to female after the main quest, that would explain the female VA as would having women Npcs.

jediakyrol wrote: In every fallout you could play as a woman...even BoS for XBox... It would be the stupidest thing in the world if they locked you to one gender (unless it was for like a flashback chapter where you are put in the shoes of your ancestor)

frogzilla98 wrote: Yeah. White men are the devil. /s

monsterseventeen wrote: i play fallout as a woman, and most games as the same character where i can put her, the reason might seem sexist, i have put her there since oblivion on playstation 3, this was the first game i played where a player could fully customise there own character, so naturally i put myself or as close as i could as the character, then half way down the gold road toward anvil a bunch of female bandits jumped out and set about me, i killed one before feeling uncomfortable, since then i have had the same kick ass woman in every game i can, i feel a great affection for her, apart from the fact she is all i want to look at 'cos i play 3rd person, i always try to find her romance.

NDDragor wrote: If they are taking away the option to play as a female, then they are destroying the creative process of creating your own and unique character that was one of the things which I enjoyed the most in the Fallout and TES series because the different characters which I created felt alive and I could play the games again and again, always making my own and new story with a different character.

But to play with a predetermined character is making me feel like something is limiting me and I cant feel the freedom of the game anymore. But this opinion of mine is only about the Fallout and TES series. There are many games where I enjoy the predetermined protagonists.

CRBASF23 wrote: This is what the kotaku article said:
The casting documents describe some of the other characters in the next Fallout's wasteland, like a radio DJ named Travis Miles and an engineer named Sturges who is described as "a cross between Buddy Holly and Vin Diesel." Casting calls for both the male and female versions of the player character note that the player begins the game in a cryogenic sleep chamber.

JianXintou wrote: @CRBASF23: Thanks for the source.

" it says you can switch to female after the main quest"
That sounds like an odd design decision. "Hey, you're done with the MQ, congrats. Now you can go to some big MT-esque geniuses that can change your sex!"

"a new "Classic Mode" that will put the game into birds eye view and play similar to the classic Fallout Games."
This sounds curious, kind of like DA. Not sure how this will play out if it's true.

She claimed that Fallout 4 is using a completely new engine: "This version uses a brand new engine built from the ground up to take advantage of the power of next gen systems. Absolutely everything is new, and no assets or scrips are being used from Fallout 3/NV or Skyrim."
From what I saw from the trailer it's more like a modified Gamebryo engine than a new one to me, but with tweaks to lighting and animations, that's all. But I'm Ok with it since this way modders will have an easier time modding it.

[Deleted3507349User]

In response to post #25832509. #25832534, #25832994, #25833799, #25833889, #25845579, #25848864, #25849549 are all replies on the same post.

digitaltrucker wrote: Do any of you who are actually familiar with the Fallout franchise (or for that matter TES) truly believe that Bethesda would limit the player to a specific gender? That would be such a massive reversal of their traditional gameplay that it's frankly unbelievable. I don't buy it.

frogzilla98 wrote: +11111111111111111111111111

Lisnpuppy wrote: I said as everyone can see, "If it is true..." I don't know if it is true yet.

However I have seen big developers take what I felt is a step in the wrong direction. Let us look at Bioware/EA with the Dragon Age games. Each one became less moddable and limited your choices more each game.

If they want to write a game with a specific PC in mind for a story...that is their prerogative. I'm not even saying it CAN'T be good. I just would not be interested in RPGs that limit choice and ignore what has been happening in gaming. Women are gamers. It is impossible to deny that the 18-30 demographic white male gamer is no longer completely accurate.

The writing of the game, how good the game is, how well-done and bug-free *cough* a game is made is obviously the most important thing. But you can have all these things and more and give gamers a choice when making RPGs. After all...it stands for role playing right? Not much of role playing when even the gender option is removed.

I will wait to see what is confirmed. I am not saying I believe things..which again is why I said "IF" it is true. It would not, however, shock me in the least.

Traditionalfire wrote: http://kotaku.com/latest-popular-fallout-4-rumor-sure-seems-like-bs-1709009561

Of course they won't

Traditionalfire wrote: When it comes to character creation, DA: Inquisition has the most options for creating a character out of all the games. You can't choose your intro thing sure but you have a ton of options when it comes to character design.

jim_uk wrote: @digitaltrucker I'm very familiar with the franchise, I've played all of the games, I'm also familiar with Bethesda and their record of removing important things every time they release a game. I really hope that Reddit post is a load of BS but I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't.

janishewski wrote: I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down.

JianXintou wrote: "I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down."
I somewhat agree with this. I honestly couldn't even remember without some serious thinking which features Beth has removed from past games. And particularly for Fallout we can't really argue that they removed crucial features from FO1/2 - there's just too much of a gap for that argument to make sense.

I have no doubt that some features will be 'removed' and others will be introduced. I also have no doubt that some people will throw tantrums because it isn't exactly like Fallout:[iNSERT NUMBER HERE}.

I further predict that it will be the most successful Fallout yet. I expect this will be to FO3 what Skyrim is to Oblivion...and that's a good thing.

[Shardoom]

Oh god this looks fantastic!

 

I've wanted to play around in a pre-devastation Fallout game since day 1!!

 

From the looks of it, this might finally be the game that lets you do it...

 

Play the pre-apocalypse quest as a pre-determined historical character up until the bombs strike. Then the clocks fast forward a couple centuries and then switch to our usual super-badass-of-our-own-creation-post-apocalyptic-wasteland-wrecking-machine!

 

(If this isn't how it is going to be I'm now going to be upset...)

Edited June 5, 2015 by Shardoom

[†TYRANICK†™]

In response to post #25824664. #25824914, #25825809, #25825919, #25826019, #25826209, #25826354, #25826574, #25828999, #25830289, #25830979, #25831614, #25832299, #25832644, #25850134 are all replies on the same post.

Lisnpuppy wrote:

 

In response to post #25824069.

znancekivell wrote: Excellent.

In fact, I have only a single complaint about the whole trailer.

We all know that Fallout 4 will ( or should! ) let us choose which gender we want to be, so as far as the actual game is concerned this is a moot point, but I am disappointed that Bethesda chose ( yet again! ) a male stand-in for the PC instead of a female wanderer. I really am becoming utterly sick of all these Caucasian males running around in video games, and I would prefer to see some actual variety in the spice of nuclear apocalyptic life.

Love the dog, by the way. Wo/Man's best friend!

If rumours are correct there is no female player character, that's going to piss some people off, as for dudes in nearly every game...



Contains strong language.

 

 

If that is true...(and I hope to the internet deities that Bethesda has learned players want MORE choices and not less) then that may actually be a deal breaker for me. That is going backwards. The last two games you could play as female so it makes little sense why you would not be able to do so now.

 

It wouldn't even be totally about the fact I am female...it is at the end, choice. Bethesda seems to narrow games more and more with each one. I don't care how pretty the graphics are or if the game has drivable cars. Let me have at least a semblance of choice and be able to choose male or female.

 

With everything that has taken place in the past few years regarding women's place in gaming I would think that in a title that is looked forward to by so many that gender choice would be a no-brainer. I would smack of lazy and that Bethesda has had its fingers in the ears and are loudly singing "la la la la la can't hear you la la la."

jim_uk wrote: This woman was mocked at the time but so far what she's said has been on the money https://www.reddit.com/r/Fallout/comments/28v2dn/i_played_fallout_4 not just the date and location but if you check out of the developer making the spin off you'll find they're a Bethesda partner and looking to hire people with Gamebryo/id Tech experience. If the post in genuine then it's not looking good for those who want choices.

Darkspazz wrote: Good lord everyone chill out, They already hired voice actors for both the male and female character, You'll be able to play as a girl. Can y'all stop circle jerking nonsense?

SMB92 wrote: Can you back that, Darkspazz, with say, some EVIDENCE :/

Back to the topic, I don't particularly feel comfortable with having a "gender change" at the end of the story, in fact if at all. I always play my character as "Trinity" from the Matrix, this would piss me off severely. And hopefully that woman from reddit isn't joking about a new engine + map size, let's hope it's moddable. With all this talk of cutting everything else, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't. But then, they'd probably want to charge wouldn't they?

JianXintou wrote: Are there any sources for these supposed VAs?

The reddit post above may not be 100% accurate but doesn't seem too far off, either.

CRBASF23 wrote: If we was really the person who leaked the information to Kotaku, why in the Kotaku article it says that they called for both Male and Female actors, when in her reddit post says you can only play as Male?

CRBASF23 wrote: Kotaku the supposed magazine which the woman leaked the info to, in it's article said that they had a casting call for both male and female VA's: http://kotaku.com/leaked-documents-reveal-that-fallout-4-is-real-set-in-1481322956

jim_uk wrote: Try reading the Reddit post, it says you can switch to female after the main quest, that would explain the female VA as would having women Npcs.

jediakyrol wrote: In every fallout you could play as a woman...even BoS for XBox... It would be the stupidest thing in the world if they locked you to one gender (unless it was for like a flashback chapter where you are put in the shoes of your ancestor)

frogzilla98 wrote: Yeah. White men are the devil. /s

monsterseventeen wrote: i play fallout as a woman, and most games as the same character where i can put her, the reason might seem sexist, i have put her there since oblivion on playstation 3, this was the first game i played where a player could fully customise there own character, so naturally i put myself or as close as i could as the character, then half way down the gold road toward anvil a bunch of female bandits jumped out and set about me, i killed one before feeling uncomfortable, since then i have had the same kick ass woman in every game i can, i feel a great affection for her, apart from the fact she is all i want to look at 'cos i play 3rd person, i always try to find her romance.

NDDragor wrote: If they are taking away the option to play as a female, then they are destroying the creative process of creating your own and unique character that was one of the things which I enjoyed the most in the Fallout and TES series because the different characters which I created felt alive and I could play the games again and again, always making my own and new story with a different character.

But to play with a predetermined character is making me feel like something is limiting me and I cant feel the freedom of the game anymore. But this opinion of mine is only about the Fallout and TES series. There are many games where I enjoy the predetermined protagonists.

CRBASF23 wrote: This is what the kotaku article said:
The casting documents describe some of the other characters in the next Fallout's wasteland, like a radio DJ named Travis Miles and an engineer named Sturges who is described as "a cross between Buddy Holly and Vin Diesel." Casting calls for both the male and female versions of the player character note that the player begins the game in a cryogenic sleep chamber.

JianXintou wrote: @CRBASF23: Thanks for the source.

" it says you can switch to female after the main quest"
That sounds like an odd design decision. "Hey, you're done with the MQ, congrats. Now you can go to some big MT-esque geniuses that can change your sex!"

"a new "Classic Mode" that will put the game into birds eye view and play similar to the classic Fallout Games."
This sounds curious, kind of like DA. Not sure how this will play out if it's true.

CRBASF23 wrote: She claimed that Fallout 4 is using a completely new engine: "This version uses a brand new engine built from the ground up to take advantage of the power of next gen systems. Absolutely everything is new, and no assets or scrips are being used from Fallout 3/NV or Skyrim."
From what I saw from the trailer it's more like a modified Gamebryo engine than a new one to me, but with tweaks to lighting and animations, that's all. But I'm Ok with it since this way modders will have an easier time modding it.

But gamebryo sucks. Look at all the problems with 32bit/64bit issues and limited RAM availibility and no x64 .EXE and the game not using more than 4 gbs of ram and a whole host of bugs, limitations and all sorts.

I for one hope it's on a brand new engine if it's really been in development for so long...I am hoping for UE4 but that's a long shot. the gamebryo engine is dead, dated and limiting, i really really hope it's not a tweaked skyrim engine or we'll suffer all the same issues as last time, but even worse.

People have 4-12gb GPUs now and 8-24GBs of RAM in there machines these days and rely on x64 a lot, if they are using a tweaked Skyrim engine well the game is crippled to x32 straight away unless they figured out how to make it x64 this time.

Time will tell.

Also that "leak" is so full of guess work, don't believe a thing.

[JianXintou]

In response to post #25832509. #25832534, #25832994, #25833799, #25833889, #25845579, #25848864, #25849549, #25852124 are all replies on the same post.

digitaltrucker wrote: Do any of you who are actually familiar with the Fallout franchise (or for that matter TES) truly believe that Bethesda would limit the player to a specific gender? That would be such a massive reversal of their traditional gameplay that it's frankly unbelievable. I don't buy it.

frogzilla98 wrote: +11111111111111111111111111

Lisnpuppy wrote: I said as everyone can see, "If it is true..." I don't know if it is true yet.

However I have seen big developers take what I felt is a step in the wrong direction. Let us look at Bioware/EA with the Dragon Age games. Each one became less moddable and limited your choices more each game.

If they want to write a game with a specific PC in mind for a story...that is their prerogative. I'm not even saying it CAN'T be good. I just would not be interested in RPGs that limit choice and ignore what has been happening in gaming. Women are gamers. It is impossible to deny that the 18-30 demographic white male gamer is no longer completely accurate.

The writing of the game, how good the game is, how well-done and bug-free *cough* a game is made is obviously the most important thing. But you can have all these things and more and give gamers a choice when making RPGs. After all...it stands for role playing right? Not much of role playing when even the gender option is removed.

I will wait to see what is confirmed. I am not saying I believe things..which again is why I said "IF" it is true. It would not, however, shock me in the least.

Traditionalfire wrote: http://kotaku.com/latest-popular-fallout-4-rumor-sure-seems-like-bs-1709009561

Of course they won't

Traditionalfire wrote: When it comes to character creation, DA: Inquisition has the most options for creating a character out of all the games. You can't choose your intro thing sure but you have a ton of options when it comes to character design.

jim_uk wrote: @digitaltrucker I'm very familiar with the franchise, I've played all of the games, I'm also familiar with Bethesda and their record of removing important things every time they release a game. I really hope that Reddit post is a load of BS but I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't.

janishewski wrote: I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down.

JianXintou wrote: "I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down."
I somewhat agree with this. I honestly couldn't even remember without some serious thinking which features Beth has removed from past games. And particularly for Fallout we can't really argue that they removed crucial features from FO1/2 - there's just too much of a gap for that argument to make sense.

digitaltrucker wrote: I have no doubt that some features will be 'removed' and others will be introduced. I also have no doubt that some people will throw tantrums because it isn't exactly like Fallout:[iNSERT NUMBER HERE}.

I further predict that it will be the most successful Fallout yet. I expect this will be to FO3 what Skyrim is to Oblivion...and that's a good thing.

"I have no doubt that some features will be 'removed' and others will be introduced. I also have no doubt that some people will throw tantrums because it isn't exactly like Fallout:[iNSERT NUMBER HERE}."
Probably, yeah. I honestly also can't see them removing crucial features. VATS? Yeah.. I don't see that happening, that's pretty much an iconic part of FO. Weapon mods? Probably not, logical progression would be to increase the modification options of both armor and weaponry as well as the creation of them. The skill/attribute system? Even more unlikely, being an RPG and somesuch. Making the game unmoddable? Equally unlikely, nobody wants to deal with the shitstorm that would follow sth. like that.

"I further predict that it will be the most successful Fallout yet. I expect this will be to FO3 what Skyrim is to Oblivion...and that's a good thing."
Wouldn't be surprised if that would be the case. And if that is correct, I am more than fine with that. And while I do think that both the Oblivion and Skyrim MQ weren't super enticing I do think the latter was far superior in almost every aspect. Particularly with the DLC. Edited June 5, 2015 by JianXintou

[Rioplats]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904 is also a reply to the same post.

JoshBadWriter wrote:

The thing I want the most is a speaking player character. I've never been one for role playing in a narrative or inserting yourself in the world or whatever. My favorite games, the ones with a narrative, player choice focus all have speaking characters with names and their own identities. Lee from The Walking Dead, Sheppard from Mass Effect, Geralt from Witcher 3. You can have a narrative that is influenced by the player and still have a main character with their own identity.

 

I take that bit at the end of the trailer as a confirmation that the player character will have a voice. From those three words, it sounds like Troy Baker, but it's hard to tell. I'm just going to say Troy Baker anyway because of course it'll be Troy Baker.

 

Does anyone else agree with me? I know a lot of people would flip out at the idea of a speaking player character.

janishewski wrote: It might be great for the game itself, but it will be a pain for modding when the protagonist suddenly goes silent. I'm personally torn. I've always said that if someone could get the characters of a game like the Witcher series matched with Bethesdas open world, we would have something truly special. And 44 hours into Wither 3, I can tell you that is not it. Good game, but not the instant classic the early reviews made it out to be and I still enjoyed the Elder Scrolls series more. Just my opinion.

I agree with janishewski. On the one hand, it would be cool to actually hear the lines of dialogue being read out, but it also destroys mod making capabilities and restricts the dialogue itself. What about special speech options that require someone to be exceptionally smart or stupid? Will it be read out in the same gruff badass main character voice? That'd be terrible.
Then there's the fact that in Bethesda games, the point is to immerse yourself in the role. In the Witcher series and Dragon Age series (2 onwards), you're playing as a predetermined character. To force that on Fallout is a bad idea.
Overall, it's just that the downsides to having a voiced protagonist far outweighs the "innovation" it adds. Edited June 5, 2015 by Rioplats

[Belthan]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904, #25854969 are all replies on the same post.

JoshBadWriter wrote:

The thing I want the most is a speaking player character. I've never been one for role playing in a narrative or inserting yourself in the world or whatever. My favorite games, the ones with a narrative, player choice focus all have speaking characters with names and their own identities. Lee from The Walking Dead, Sheppard from Mass Effect, Geralt from Witcher 3. You can have a narrative that is influenced by the player and still have a main character with their own identity.

 

I take that bit at the end of the trailer as a confirmation that the player character will have a voice. From those three words, it sounds like Troy Baker, but it's hard to tell. I'm just going to say Troy Baker anyway because of course it'll be Troy Baker.

 

Does anyone else agree with me? I know a lot of people would flip out at the idea of a speaking player character.

janishewski wrote: It might be great for the game itself, but it will be a pain for modding when the protagonist suddenly goes silent. I'm personally torn. I've always said that if someone could get the characters of a game like the Witcher series matched with Bethesdas open world, we would have something truly special. And 44 hours into Wither 3, I can tell you that is not it. Good game, but not the instant classic the early reviews made it out to be and I still enjoyed the Elder Scrolls series more. Just my opinion.

Rioplats wrote: I agree with janishewski. On the one hand, it would be cool to actually hear the lines of dialogue being read out, but it also destroys mod making capabilities and restricts the dialogue itself. What about special speech options that require someone to be exceptionally smart or stupid? Will it be read out in the same gruff badass main character voice? That'd be terrible.
Then there's the fact that in Bethesda games, the point is to immerse yourself in the role. In the Witcher series and Dragon Age series (2 onwards), you're playing as a predetermined character. To force that on Fallout is a bad idea.
Overall, it's just that the downsides to having a voiced protagonist far outweighs the "innovation" it adds.

My preference would be to not have the protagonist voiced at all. Having a choice of voices (e.g. Saint's Row) would be second-best. Having a single voice would be less immersive, but not a deal-breaker. I love the Mass Effect series and The Witcher series, and in those games, having a character with a predetermined personality (or at best, a limited range of personality options) works. It just isn't what I expect from true RPGs like the Fallout and Elder Scrolls series.

EDIT - And I forgot to mention the player character in FO3 and FNV is voiced, at least when you get injured :)

EDIT 2 - I also forgot to mention re: modding, it seems that there will have to be some flexibility in the system so they don't box themselves in when it comes to DLC. What happens if the voice actor(s) wins an Oscar and wants 10 times as much to do the DLC than was paid for the base game, or God forbid, gets hit by a bus? Edited June 5, 2015 by Belthan

[Deleted3507349User]

In response to post #25832509. #25832534, #25832994, #25833799, #25833889, #25845579, #25848864, #25849549, #25852124, #25853429 are all replies on the same post.

digitaltrucker wrote: Do any of you who are actually familiar with the Fallout franchise (or for that matter TES) truly believe that Bethesda would limit the player to a specific gender? That would be such a massive reversal of their traditional gameplay that it's frankly unbelievable. I don't buy it.

frogzilla98 wrote: +11111111111111111111111111

Lisnpuppy wrote: I said as everyone can see, "If it is true..." I don't know if it is true yet.

However I have seen big developers take what I felt is a step in the wrong direction. Let us look at Bioware/EA with the Dragon Age games. Each one became less moddable and limited your choices more each game.

If they want to write a game with a specific PC in mind for a story...that is their prerogative. I'm not even saying it CAN'T be good. I just would not be interested in RPGs that limit choice and ignore what has been happening in gaming. Women are gamers. It is impossible to deny that the 18-30 demographic white male gamer is no longer completely accurate.

The writing of the game, how good the game is, how well-done and bug-free *cough* a game is made is obviously the most important thing. But you can have all these things and more and give gamers a choice when making RPGs. After all...it stands for role playing right? Not much of role playing when even the gender option is removed.

I will wait to see what is confirmed. I am not saying I believe things..which again is why I said "IF" it is true. It would not, however, shock me in the least.

Traditionalfire wrote: http://kotaku.com/latest-popular-fallout-4-rumor-sure-seems-like-bs-1709009561

Of course they won't

Traditionalfire wrote: When it comes to character creation, DA: Inquisition has the most options for creating a character out of all the games. You can't choose your intro thing sure but you have a ton of options when it comes to character design.

jim_uk wrote: @digitaltrucker I'm very familiar with the franchise, I've played all of the games, I'm also familiar with Bethesda and their record of removing important things every time they release a game. I really hope that Reddit post is a load of BS but I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't.

janishewski wrote: I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down.

JianXintou wrote: "I agree with everything Bethesda has removed from their franchises as time has gone on. The lone exception was spell creation and even then, I never used it. Streamlining interfaces and systems is not dumbing down."
I somewhat agree with this. I honestly couldn't even remember without some serious thinking which features Beth has removed from past games. And particularly for Fallout we can't really argue that they removed crucial features from FO1/2 - there's just too much of a gap for that argument to make sense.

digitaltrucker wrote: I have no doubt that some features will be 'removed' and others will be introduced. I also have no doubt that some people will throw tantrums because it isn't exactly like Fallout:[iNSERT NUMBER HERE}.

I further predict that it will be the most successful Fallout yet. I expect this will be to FO3 what Skyrim is to Oblivion...and that's a good thing.

JianXintou wrote: "I have no doubt that some features will be 'removed' and others will be introduced. I also have no doubt that some people will throw tantrums because it isn't exactly like Fallout:[iNSERT NUMBER HERE}."
Probably, yeah. I honestly also can't see them removing crucial features. VATS? Yeah.. I don't see that happening, that's pretty much an iconic part of FO. Weapon mods? Probably not, logical progression would be to increase the modification options of both armor and weaponry as well as the creation of them. The skill/attribute system? Even more unlikely, being an RPG and somesuch. Making the game unmoddable? Equally unlikely, nobody wants to deal with the shitstorm that would follow sth. like that.

"I further predict that it will be the most successful Fallout yet. I expect this will be to FO3 what Skyrim is to Oblivion...and that's a good thing."
Wouldn't be surprised if that would be the case. And if that is correct, I am more than fine with that. And while I do think that both the Oblivion and Skyrim MQ weren't super enticing I do think the latter was far superior in almost every aspect. Particularly with the DLC.

The appeal of the various quests doesn't lie so much in the quests themselves, but in the fact that they give your character something to DO - thus allowing you to weave intricate stories unique to that character (many of which aren't really in the game in any quest-like form). TES has that, and so do FO:3 and FO:NV. The Fallout series is a bit more story-driven, but there's still lots of leeway.

This is why I love these series; they're full of things you CAN do instead of locking you into things you HAVE to do. Many of my characters ignore the major quests completely and just do their own thing. Just google up Nondrick and Nordrick for the type of thing I'm talking about.

I really hope they don't have full voice acting for the PC. Assorted grunts and groans are one thing, but if the PC is fully voice acted it's not so much a game as an interactive movie.