"Solving" the 4-options dialogue system

[TeamBacon]

 

 

That is not an example of good storytelling by any means.

 

Having 7 different skill checks is just cheapening the whole idea into a catch all where anyone can solve this problem. Plus, in a videogame it would make much more sense to let the player interact and not menu crawl. Have the player walk over to the pool's underground system and give them the option to sabotage it if you have enough Intelligence.

 

Gameplay as opposed to menu crawling. Remember, we have real time dialogue now, this stuff can be much more fun.

 

 

 

This undoubtedly is not a good way to tell story, but it definitely is a better way to play a game. Minus those options that can be done without talking (which happens to be only no. 6, 8 in the Courier's branch), we still have a lot of ways to finish a conversation, and the number is definitely not less than 4.

 

Until real VR and more advanced AI are invented, menu will continue to be the most effective way to provide roleplaying possibilities and freedom for the players.

 

DAO and its sequels are good examples, though I believe it would get completely off-topic very soon if we continue discussing it.

 

 

Menus are far from the most effective way to provide roleplaying when you have an entire world to interact with. Why spend all your time in a dull menu when you have such a vibrant environment to interact with and let the player do things as opposed to just read things?

 

Why have a dialogue option to push over a lamp or hit a breaker box when you can actually give the player to walk over to the lamp and push it or shoot the breaker box with your gun?

 

Also, having more than a couple skill checks in a single choice is a cop out and poor design. It cheapens the value of skill checks in general. Different checks should be incorporated at different points in the conversation so that the player can't win them all. That puts value to your particular roleplaying style and doesn't just always give you a right answer to everything. Most of the time, having a skill check invalidates the other options because now you have a 'right' answer.

 

If one option is a clear win, then choice is eliminated from the player even if there are other options. For this reason they should be spread out in a way where you can't just win them all, but you are given plenty of individual opportunities to use different skills you may have.

[anbeegod]

 

What are you talking about?

Fo4 has more side quests and factions to join unlike FO3.

 

 

Except these factions provide nothing more than longer questline(s) and mods. Plus, there are only 2 ending, and both of which don't even care what you've done in the game. And I don't think F4 has more side quests than F3; even if there's indeed more in F4, they're of lower quality than F3. Name two side quests that have moral dilemma in F4 to convince me I'm wrong.

[Boombro]

Those are good points team bacon.

We do have the tech from what we saw in FO4.

We can also have quests the player can't do if he doesn't have a some perks/tools etc. Let say you can't do a seduction base questssince you don't have lady killer/black widow, that you can't clear a path without the bomb perk, that you can't make that littler girl doll be a robot with that the robot perk etc. That can more replay ability.

 

 

 

And I don't think F4 has more side quests than F3

ummm..

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_4_quests#Side_quests

http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_3_quests#Side_quests

 

 

xcept these factions provide nothing more than longer questline(s) and mods

These still legit and where not in the past game.

 

 

Name two side quests that have moral dilemma in F4 to convince me I'm wrong.

Human Error and The Secret of Cabot House?

 

Most are in faction questlines. Like blind and the battle for hill. There are also random events.

 

Name two quests or even any moral issue in FO3. I hardly recall any.

 

And how does a quest having moral dilemma makes a quest good in anyway?

Edited March 30, 2016 by Boombro

[Boombro]

....

Edited March 30, 2016 by Boombro

[anbeegod]

 

Menus are far from the most effective way to provide roleplaying when you have an entire world to interact with. Why spend all your time in a dull menu when you have such a vibrant environment to interact with and let the player do things as opposed to just read things?

 

Why have a dialogue option to push over a lamp or hit a breaker box when you can actually give the player to walk over to the lamp and push it or shoot the breaker box with your gun?

 

Also, having more than a couple skill checks in a single choice is a cop out and poor design. It cheapens the value of skill checks in general. Different checks should be incorporated at different points in the conversation so that the player can't win them all. That puts value to your particular roleplaying style and doesn't just always give you a right answer to everything. Most of the time, having a skill check invalidates the other options because now you have a 'right' answer.

 

If one option is a clear win, then choice is eliminated from the player even if there are other options. For this reason they should be spread out in a way where you can't just win them all, but you are given plenty of individual opportunities to use different skills you may have.

 

 

 

Except the game doesn't have a clear idea of what kind of character you are. Perhaps I'm a stupid wizard who knows nothing more than magic, or someone who kills bad people because they get into my way instead of a righteous cause, or a hypocritical man who talks nicely but would do something really piss others off when the time comes. (These are just examples, I know how to make them logical in the story using CK; but they give the idea)

 

The game doesn't recognize a stupid wizard, because a wizard is stereotyped to be wise and intelligent; nor does it recognize a bad guy who does good things, because good things are stereotyped to be done by good guys. In this way, what else can the game do to ensure that everyone can roleplay as much as they like? Sadly, with limited AI technology, unimmersive menus is our only way.

 

Ultimately, games (at least this gen's) are just series of codes which cannot understand the complexity of humanity. This is why the karma system is an epic fail.

[Boombro]

 

Sadly, with limited AI technology, unimmersive menus is our only way.

Not really.

you could gun down a fringe in FO4 maybe they are more like that, but I have horrible recall of anything that happen if a week has passed.

 

Edit:

If you melee a gas can, it will blow up.

Edited March 30, 2016 by Boombro

[JTL2]

 

↑. How did he get there?Sole Survivor:

↓. Don't worry, I'll save him.

→. Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

←. (Sarcastic) Oh look, the most useful mother ever who saves her son by yelling bulls***.

 

Don't forget, no matter what Dialogue option you choose, a Side Quest will automatically start which never go away until you save him.

[Boombro]

 

 

↑. How did he get there?Sole Survivor:

↓. Don't worry, I'll save him.

→. Give it up. You'll be better off without that brat.

←. (Sarcastic) Oh look, the most useful mother ever who saves her son by yelling bulls***.

 

Don't forget, no matter what Dialogue option you choose, a Side Quest will automatically start which never go away until you save him.

 

Expect if you walked away.

Why no ever tries walking away?

[JTL2]

 

Expect if you walked away.

Why no ever tries walking away?

 

 

Sure, you can walk away. But the side quest Timmy's Stuck In A Well stays open in your journal in perpetuity.

 

You can tell Preston to go to hell when you meet him. He'll get pissy with you. You can leave the area. For hours. Days. Months. But if you wonder back into Concord, accidentally kill the Deathcaw, Preston will thank you for saving them and offer you to help him further in Sanctuary.

 

In my opinion, a mod that would actually kill Preston and the minutemen if you abandoned them would work way better for my immersion, then a million dialogue options. I think the current voiced dialogue (at least from NPC's) could be sufficient to make a mod like this work. Without adding dozens of new dialogue options, and then trying to link the NPC responses to each one.

Edited March 30, 2016 by JTL2

[anbeegod]

 

Human Error and The Secret of Cabot House?

Most are in faction questlines. Like blind and the battle for hill. There are also random events.

 

Name two quests or even any moral issue in FO3. I hardly recall any.

 

And how does a quest having moral dilemma makes a quest good in anyway?

 

Moral dilemma/grey areas enrich a story's depth, especially in games like the Fallout series. Unless it's a LotR type of epic story, a story without moral/ethical dilemma is shallow and not-worth reading. F4 main quest has very rich moral dilemma and grey areas, but Beth's writers failed to fully extend their potential.

 

Human error is the only side quest in F4 that makes people think deeply. The Carbot House quest doesn't really have moral issue involved, because you're required to choose between a psycho old guy and his family which want to make use of him. The only thing that matters to players' choice is not their moral standard, but the prize for choosing either side (gun or serum). The other quests like Pickman gallery and stealing from Hancock are just as straight-forward as misc quests, your choices don't matter, why you choose those choices doesn't matter either.

 

Name 2 F3 quests that makes people think? Tenpenny Tower, which you choose between 2 hate groups, both have got fair reasons, and no perfect outcome exists. Arefu is a good example as well.

 

Though honestly, neither F3 or F4 are good Fallouts anyways.

Edited March 30, 2016 by anbeegod