Fallout 4 announced with teaser trailer

[Nacke]

I wonder what would happen if Bethesda featured player voice in FO4

[Nacke]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904, #25854969, #25855279, #25857314 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.

Belthan wrote: 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?

djhater wrote: NO Fallout 4 would be awwwseumz if Todd Howard narrated & Voiced the main character in Fallout 4!!! could you imagine playing the awesomeness of Fallout 4 hearing egotistical one liners .

Introducing a player voice would screw up the self-tailoring character element making FO and Skyrim the NO1 game for many players, and it would do some damage to modding which holds a huuuge audience for Skyrim and FO. If they are smart they will not introduce player-voice. There are already several good games with player-voice, and I think that's enough.

[JianXintou]

In response to post #25832509. #25832534, #25832994, #25833799, #25833889, #25845579, #25848864, #25849549, #25852124, #25853429, #25857164 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.

digitaltrucker wrote: 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.

@digitaltrucker: Good points. I usually did a speed run in which I did the MQ and then wandered off to do other stuff (unless a certain amount of progress in the MQ was practical). Definitely agree on the non-linear storyline possibilites, that's something that always nagged me with games like ME, DA and the likes.

[JianXintou]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904, #25854969, #25855279, #25857314, #25857619 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.

Belthan wrote: 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?

djhater wrote: NO Fallout 4 would be awwwseumz if Todd Howard narrated & Voiced the main character in Fallout 4!!! could you imagine playing the awesomeness of Fallout 4 hearing egotistical one liners .

Nacke wrote: Introducing a player voice would screw up the self-tailoring character element making FO and Skyrim the NO1 game for many players, and it would do some damage to modding which holds a huuuge audience for Skyrim and FO. If they are smart they will not introduce player-voice. There are already several good games with player-voice, and I think that's enough.

"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?"
Introduce new characters.

I agree with the ambivalence towards a voice-acted player, particularly within the modding context. What I think would work pretty well for both modding, and both sides of the immersive realm (i.e. those who don't and those who would like a VA player) would be to just make it an option that you can turn on and off in the settings. That way, you can pretty much solve both issues (and the one you raised above).

Another (albeit vastly unlikely) would be Bethesda giving us a VA package with sound files so we could splice them together as we need them. Edited June 5, 2015 by JianXintou

[DarthDonut117]

In response to post #25852269.

Shardoom wrote: 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...)

Perhaps your character you make is from pre-war, then you're put into some kind of stasis, which wouldn't be that much of a stretch (Vault 112 had stasis pods for the simulation). I just think it would be interesting to explore the wasteland from the perspective of someone who knew what it used to be like.

[Shoeburglar]

Calling it now game of the century

[jediakyrol]

In response to post #25833964. #25847804 is also a reply to the same post.

Twilightwolf4 wrote: My hope is that Fallout4 takes place retroactively before the first Fallout

Would be nice to see how the world fell so far

DoctorE3 wrote: Honestly not much happened before then. There were mostly black rain for the first years following the bombs, and afew vaults opened and some groups formed. Literally nothing interesting happened at the time except for some brotherhood and enclave stuff. i'd much rather see history in its making than experience what I've already been told is pretty boring.

Now the Resource Wars though...(the 20 year period before the Great War) Especially if set in Europe!

[Dukoth]

In response to post #25848824. #25848904, #25854969, #25855279, #25857314, #25857619, #25858509 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.

Belthan wrote: 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?

djhater wrote: NO Fallout 4 would be awwwseumz if Todd Howard narrated & Voiced the main character in Fallout 4!!! could you imagine playing the awesomeness of Fallout 4 hearing egotistical one liners .

Nacke wrote: Introducing a player voice would screw up the self-tailoring character element making FO and Skyrim the NO1 game for many players, and it would do some damage to modding which holds a huuuge audience for Skyrim and FO. If they are smart they will not introduce player-voice. There are already several good games with player-voice, and I think that's enough.

JianXintou wrote: "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?"
Introduce new characters.

I agree with the ambivalence towards a voice-acted player, particularly within the modding context. What I think would work pretty well for both modding, and both sides of the immersive realm (i.e. those who don't and those who would like a VA player) would be to just make it an option that you can turn on and off in the settings. That way, you can pretty much solve both issues (and the one you raised above).

Another (albeit vastly unlikely) would be Bethesda giving us a VA package with sound files so we could splice them together as we need them.

how is the character speaking for the game and then not speaking for mod content any different than when NPC's do it, we've already been putting up with this since oblivion

@belthan - the voice actors would be under a contract for the game and the DLC, they cant ask for any more money

[KeltecRFB]

In response to post #25852269. #25858639 is also a reply to the same post.

Shardoom wrote: 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...)

DarthDonut117 wrote: Perhaps your character you make is from pre-war, then you're put into some kind of stasis, which wouldn't be that much of a stretch (Vault 112 had stasis pods for the simulation). I just think it would be interesting to explore the wasteland from the perspective of someone who knew what it used to be like.

Interactive Pre-War Flashbacks so we can see that side would be cool! Edited June 5, 2015 by KeltecRFB

[BarbyFN]

mmm help me with this but.... does it looks like worse than the current Fallout 3 modded?

 

And that city looks too crowded and colorful (for that reason I don't like New Vegas)...

 

Finally, I don't like the voice on the lone wanderer, the best of Fallout 3 was its loneliness... well, lets wait to a gameplay...