Todd Howard says that Fallout 4's cinematic dialogue system 'really did not resonate' with players, even though Bethesda 'spent forever' working on it : fallout

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It doesn't bother me to the point that, having pre-ordered with season pass, I have over 6,600 hours in the game so far.

However, I did recently play through London, and that reminded me that I was fine with the previous system, too. Either works for me, but the previous system makes modding easier, I expect.

I sincerely hope that Bethesda stops breaking their game for mods, they must understand that the reason it's still so strong is the modding community, and that they provide free access to the tools to mod it. Please, leave Fallout 4 alone! Go work on something else. If they ever do produce Fallout 5, and somehow try to further monetize the modding community, I think they'll fail, again. Hopefully Todd will get replaced with someone more attune to the reasons for Bethesda's successes so far, since he seems to be losing the plot, and they can get back on track.

[–] mysticpickle@lemmy.ca 51 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Spends forever on cinematic dialogue system

Spend almost no effort on writing compelling storylines to use it in

Why doesn't our game resonate with players?!

[–] Macchi_the_Slime@piefed.blahaj.zone 39 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Right? So-called "Cinematic Dialogue System"

The Dialogue:

Yes

Sarcastic Yes

No(Yes)

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Except on few occasions, I felt the same with Mass Effect:

a) [PARAGON] space hero response. b) [RENEGADE] asshole space hero response. c) (broods).

[–] BurgerBaron@piefed.social 8 points 2 weeks ago

Even worse it locked you out of responses unless you picked red or blue always. Idk it annoyed me, playing chaotic neutral.

[–] Macchi_the_Slime@piefed.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 weeks ago

Even then honestly, Mass Effect came our in 2007, Fallout 4 was 2015. Mass Effect was about a specific character that yes you were supposed to be able to shape and mold, but the expectation that the Fallout series had built up was for you to be basically anyone. And to my recollection 4 did nothing to temper that expectation going in with their new dialogue system and voiced protagonist.

[–] shyguyblue@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, as soon as they kidnapped the baby I thought, "he's going to be dead, or come back as the bad guy"

[–] DarkSirrush@piefed.ca 14 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

My first play through, the first thing I did when I got to the institute was shoot him in the face.

Imagine my surprise when the quest log immediately spoils the reveal that I didn't even get to, as if i had done at least another hour of gameplay and politely told my son to pound sand.

I guess Bethesda never expected players to immediately kill the NPC that at that point your character thought stole your baby for some reason?

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I did the same thing on my first as well. Then I started looting while being attacked and I got lost as it was my first time in there. Had to put down every single being in there, and as I wasn't expecting all that, I was running real low on ammo by the time I made it out, heavily overburdened with loot.

[–] real_squids@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 weeks ago

The dialogue UI and the fact they introduced random checks for some of the options (that you could just cheese by reloading) are such obvious issues too.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's a shame that Fallout 4 really locked you into a character with a pre-written name, a fairly detailed backstory, and dialog (both the actual words and the voice delivery) that gave a sense of laser focused motivation. I felt absolutely nothing for Shaun, and therefore the entire main quest was a chore.

It would have been so easy to just have some plot other than getting Shaun back. Removing that as motivation and removing some of the player character backstory would open things up for players.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Doesnt help we already did the same basic plot in Fallout 3.

[–] 58008@lemmy.world 33 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

One of the first mods I looked for after playing the game for an hour back in 2015 was one that restored the 'classic' dialogue system and let you see exactly what your character would say before you chose a dialogue option. I was already done with being confused and blindsided by what came out of my character's mouth; it felt like I was rolling the dice every time, instead of being an active and knowing participant in the conversation. The system that shipped with the game was bizarre, I don't know how anyone could ever prefer it. I also don't understand how the devs went along with the idea. I can only assume Todd decided it should be that way and no one working under him was in a position to question it.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" springs to mind.

[–] MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That sort of mod is an absolute must-have for FO4.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

You mean you don't want to choose a simple, sane option and have your character unprovokedly run into an unhinged psychotic screaming session for absolutely no reason?

You are really disappointing Mr.Howard with that kind of attitude /s

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago

The "problem" with those mods is they lay bare how thin the dialog choices really are.

[–] warm@kbin.earth 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It was 100% Todd saying he wants that. That's how most of the bullshit in Fallout came around.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

i'm convinced the only reason Fallout TV is good is cause theres theres enough people in enough positions to tell Todd Howard to shut up with his idiotic ideas.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

It was also hard on our designers to write that way

This is an interesting line.

The gems in Oblivion, Fallout 3 and such were little caves and crevies where it felt like some lone, unhinged dev went wild with environmental storytelling. You know, the posed skeletons, wall graffiti, the zombie you just read about, the mad painter or mad Daedra or mad robot or Vault social experiment or stuff like that. They were these self contained, cheap to produce but plentiful stories you'd stumble into.

...But writing stuff cinematically (and railroaded) feels more like a team thing. It must *be harder to eek good writing out of that, especially if they aren't used to it.

[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Probably my favorite part of both games and the reason their worlds still felt lived. The same applies to Cyberpunk.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah.

KCD II as well. This is even where 'fillery' games like AC Odyssey shine.

A successful dev strategy seems to be 'let writers go mad in mini quests/dungeons'

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago

And these little stories to find are what keeps the game fresh on every playthrough, even a decade later. There's always something new I haven't seen before, new little gags and hidden stories I had previously overlooked. And the best part is that many of them are very far off the beaten path, encouraging you to actually explore and take in the world instead of just fast traveling everywhere and rushing through it.

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The cinematic dialogue system could have worked fine, if the dialogue was any good, and the diff story lines were actually interesting or had real consequences. It absolutely wasn't the story that kept me playing fallout 4.

[–] JakenVeina@midwest.social 18 points 2 weeks ago

"A lot of players were like, 'That's not the voice I hear in my head'."

Dude completely missing the point, as usual lately.

The complaint was "That's not what the dialog option on the screen was, that's something completely different.". It had nothing to do with the voice.

Also, the fact that, for all the dialog, there was almost never any actual CHOICE for players to make.

Y'all remember the mod that re-wrote the on-screen dialogue options to actually match the spoken dialogue?

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Where the fuck is Todd getting this feedback from?

I'm sure there's some people that didn't like it because "but muh self insert silent protag", but the usual criticism I see has been hashed out entirely and has been incredibly consistent for fucking years.

You weren't given much in the way of actual choice, at times the short option summaries felt wildly disconnected from the actual dialogue the MC spoke, and limiting a series known for the roleplaying down to (at best) two versions of yes one option for later and one option to open a sub dialogue tree for more info was like removing a track and field runner's kneecaps to try and speed them up through reduced weight.

You could technically summarize that up as people not vibing with the voice acting, but the issue is ultimately a profound reduction of choice, world, and story depth without anything to replace it.

Bethesda seems to think that they can have their cake and eat it too by simplifying existing systems in an attempt to appeal to more casual players, while adding more systems that are only an inch deep to try and keep the existing fans.

The end result is that everything in these games becomes half baked gruel. There's nothing to invest yourself in because even if there's tons of systems, none of them have enough depth or polish to be particularly enjoyable. All the new bells and whistles sound cool on paper (settlements, procgen infinite planets, ship building, customizing weapons and armor, legendary enemies with different modifiers, procedurally generated base defense missions) but end up as just disappointments.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

at times the short option summaries felt wildly disconnected from the actual dialogue the MC spoke

The number of [sarcastic] dialog options that were actually just unhinged threats was wild. I'm convinced whoever wrote those doesn't know what sarcasm is.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

"Are you here for the synth?"

[Sarcastic]: "Uh... I'm here to pick up an order? Two large pepperonis and a calzone. Name is 'Fuck You.'"

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Where the fuck is Todd getting this feedback from?

5 bucks says its AI.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You spent forever on that? It's literally just a static camera position that changes to face the current speaker. Brother! These guys stink!

[–] janNatan@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago

Maybe he meant they spent forever writing the dialogue. Which like, yeah, that's what making a role-playing game is like, my guy.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Did you like the Fallout 4 Dialog system?

Yes
No (But Yes, possibly unhinged in tone)
Irritated Yes
Exit Conversation (But to continue you must come back and say yes)

I dont know who couldnt love such an immersive and wonderful system /s

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

By "cinematic dialogue" he means extremely dumbed down four options dialogue for cretins who cannot even read a proper sentence to choose from? Where at least three options were giving the same outcome?

Learn from Obsidian, you morons.

[–] Zozano@aussie.zone 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yes
Yes (sarcastic)
Yes (but not right now)
Tell me more, so I can decide whether to choose Yes, Yes or Yes

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 weeks ago

Keep gilding that turd in chocolate, Howard. I'm sure someone'll nibble eventually. 🖕🏼

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Wtf was there to spend forever on?? You pick four options and then respond?

If it was difficult, then it must be because the engine is hot-buttered arse.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I assume because there was a ton of voice acting and animating for all that dialog. That is a lot of work. Problem is just because it was a lot of work didn't make it automatically good.

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'll concede getting the takes for voices is effort but it wasn't like every dialogue choice would be accompanied by custom animations. Both as a matter of realistic expectations and also based on what I remember from playing. Even mouth animations can procedurally generated based on sound files.

Note: all heat is directed at Todd, not you.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I'm just saying, that's a lot of work to record and add in every bit of player character dialog (male and female character voices). It still takes development time to go through and make sure the dialog animations don't look (too) messed up and make sure characters aren't talking over eachother and things like that.

There's also the fact that during game development, dialogs can change. Which means if an earlier version of a dialog was recorded, it needs to be re-recorded. It's an extra layer of hassle compared to just changing a text box.

Part of the reason most RPGs don't do voiced player dialog is the amount of extra work it takes. The end result in Fallout 4 was underwhelming because of the writing, but it was still a lot of (potentially misguided) effort to have everything voiced.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

I think in another 10-15 years from now it'd be fine. With ai helping blend in changes in facial and tonal cues. Like you could see in their face a different reaction and hear it in their voice. But as it was, all those lines of extra voice (done twice over!) took up too much space. So you get my characters dumb goofy smile while his voice tone sounds sad as he's delivering horrible news to someone. Sometimes it's funny, but it really kills any immersion.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

i kinda figured the fallout community was for fallout fans. all i see is hate 🤔

[–] VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Buddy, that's what Fallout fans are all about.

If you want an actual explanation, this results from the fact that Fallout 1, 2, and New Vegas were made by largely the same people, but 3 and 4 were not.

Fallout 3 was my first-ever RPG. I love that game. It probably has my favorite Bethesda world, and I actually like scavenging the wasteland. Fallout 4 is considerably weaker, in my opinion. But, I still had my fun with it. Especially Far Harbor, Far Harbor is fantastic. That said, they are downgrades if you are an RPG fan. Fallout has been a roleplaying game since its inception, and removing a lot of the choice that players had in the older titles is going to rub some people the wrong way.

I think the general hateful attitude in the community toward Bethesda does prevent a lot of fans of the Bethesda games from seeing the side of West Coast Fallout fans. That said, I can't exactly blame them. Fallout 3 and 4 are designed around exploring and scavenging, and the West Coast games are designed around making choices and having your choices affect you or the world in some way.

Like, if they took Call of Duty and made it the greatest fighting game of all time, people would not like it based on the pure fact that they wanted a shooter. The same thing with Fallout 3 and 4. Only I would say that Fallout 3 has an excellently-designed world for exploring, and Fallout 4 is middling. That's my opinion though. You'll read many in the Fallout community.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

people are too often blinded by what they wish they had they forget the great things they do have

im not gonna complain that fallout 1 and 2 arent first person games. i appreciate there are different ways fallout has been made. even brotherhood of steel even though that game really sucks

[–] VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Of course you're not going to complain about Fallout 1 and 2, you're viewing them in hindsight.

Imagine if Fallout 5 comes out and it's just a gacha game. Were you expecting that, or were you expecting something that stayed faithful to Fallout 4's crafting and exploration mechanics?

Same story with Fallout 4. New Vegas was the previous Fallout game, and people were expecting 4 to model itself after its roleplaying.

West Coast Fallout fans are, unfortunately, not blinded by what they wish they had. They wish they had a post nuclear role playing game that focuses on the utter humanity of the trials and terrors with which you're presented, and they have that in 1, 2, and New Vegas. They just also wanted the series to carry on that tradition. There's nothing wrong with spinoffs or trying new things, but to not have player choice as a design pillar in an RPG is a misstep, I think.

I say 'they,' but in reality I am a West Coast Fallout fan. Again, I love Fallout 3, and I've played a shitload of 4. But 3 is not exactly well thought out in terms of lore, and 4 feels more like Borderlands than Fallout in both gameplay and tone.

It's just not what I'm looking for in an RPG, and I do wish Bethesda would accurately respond to feedback. Because they still think that the voiced character was the main thing we had a problem with, when The Witcher 3 came out the same year to critical renown.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

wasteland is what the og fallout fans have. it was the original fallout. that has had new games recently as well

and if fallout 5 came out and was a gacha game, I'd certainly be surprised, but if it was good like (almost) all the other games then that'd be cool too

[–] VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Right. But do you think that marketing that game as Fallout 5 sets reasonable expectations, or should it perhaps be released as Fallout: Gacha? That's merely my point.

I'm not really sure what your point about the Wasteland series is. Yes, I can go play Wasteland 1, 2, or 3. I'm talking about how it's going to cause ire if you start deprioritizing foundational aspects of an ongoing series. Which Fallout 3 started, and Fallout 4 continued, and Fallout 76.

[–] BigBananaDealer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

my point on wasteland is if people arent a fan of the direction fallout turned, they still have wasteland as an option

[–] VerilyFemme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago

It is a good option indeed. But, we're Fallout fans. I, personally, would like to see more games in that world that carry on its deep exploration of humanity, player choice, and RPG themes. Fallout's a big part of a lot of people's lives, and I think that it's perfectly normal to want it to continue in its own tradition.

I don't think it's reasonable to be, like, toxic or obsessed about it, but it's totally okay to criticize series you like. Vocal feedback from the fanbase helps build the community. Bethesda's business model is based upon mass appeal, which means drawing in fans of other game types. This really boosted the popularity of Fallout with Fallout 3, where they sought to draw in FPS fans. Then Fallout 4 brought in survival crafting elements. These aren't bad additions, but they focused on those over the actual RPG mechanics.

You see the feedback here. It's community-wide, not just Lemmy. In this case, Todd Howard has missed the point of what fans didn't like about the game mechanics. They have a new audience, and there's no need to actually delve into the problems that people had.

It's just a weird experience to have the dev of your favorite series be like, "Actually, we want a new audience," and start catering to a different crowd using the series you like. I also totally get why people that prefer the Bethesda Fallout games feel that way, they do their gameplay loops solidly and are dripping with atmosphere. But there's always going to be ire from the community if they just kinda, stop caring about the experience that drew in the people that gave Fallout its initial success. Which it really feels like they have. Or maybe Fallout fans are just whiny, idk. Thanks for reading my essay.

[–] Rosencrantz23@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I thought it was alright

Fallout

Rules: