[QUOTE=DiscoInferno;49605579]But if it's a dialogue minefield, there's every chance you can max charisma and just completely fail at convincing anyone because you're the div that clicks the "lemme grab yo tiddies" options on those porn flash games.
Not that I've played those sort of things.[/QUOTE]
Which makes sense to me. Just like if you max out every combat-relevant relevant skill but don't know how to use cover, aim, or time your attacks, then you're going to lose every time. Bringing the balance of player skill vs character skill for non combat systems more in line with that of combat systems sounds like a good thing to me.
[QUOTE=Hamaflavian;49606059]Which makes sense to me. Just like if you max out every combat-relevant relevant skill but don't know how to use cover, aim, or time your attacks, then you're going to lose every time. Bringing the balance of player skill vs character skill for non combat systems more in line with that of combat systems sounds like a good thing to me.[/QUOTE]
There's a stark difference between those two game mechanics though. You're expected to be able to point and shoot in a first person shooter, but you shouldn't be expected to be able to argue with virtual characters who behave in unpredictable ways.
There's simply too many variables to take account for when you're trying to add player skill into speech checks. Either you make it too easy and hilariously trivialize the whole speech system, making your character seem like he's speaking down to retards, or you make it more grounded in realism, and therefore almost impossible for most people.
[QUOTE=_charon;49605362]putting points into Speech/Charisma so you have the power to tell a boss "Nah, I don't feel like fighting you, you can just go home" is boring.[/QUOTE]
then don't?
Some people actually like having the option to kill as little as possible, if at all. Finding a peaceful solution can be rewarding.
There's a game that became really popular lately with that approach, in fact. I don't even need to say the name, you probably know what it is already.
[QUOTE=StoneRabbit;49605730]a huge wasted opportunity[/QUOTE]
Welcome to Fallout 4.
[QUOTE=Everything;49606142]There's a game that became really popular lately with that approach, in fact. I don't even need to say the name, you probably know what it is already.[/QUOTE]
You might need to say the name because I don't know what you're talking about. And I really like games where I can do the assassin/stealth killer approach. I tried that with Metro 2033 with pretty great success.
I can't wait for the half-dozen 10$ Disappointment Packs™
[QUOTE=fear me;49606111]then don't?[/QUOTE]
Aside from the previous fallouts, where other skills influenced dialog, this one sadly doesn't so you kinda have to ride the Charisma train to get anything kinda decent from trading and building settlements in Fallout 4, save for the additional perks needed to build things, like Medic, armorer, gun nut, etc.
[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;49606163]You might need to say the name because I don't know what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]
Undertale.
You can beat the entire game without killing anything (finding ways to stall or talk them down instead), and in fact you get worse endings if you resort to violence.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49604429]But the minutemen don't even have to attack any other faction if you play your cards right[/QUOTE]
Ya but you still have to kill the institute
[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;49606105]There's a stark difference between those two game mechanics though. You're expected to be able to point and shoot in a first person shooter, but you shouldn't be expected to be able to argue with virtual characters who behave in unpredictable ways.
There's simply too many variables to take account for when you're trying to add player skill into speech checks. Either you make it too easy and hilariously trivialize the whole speech system, making your character seem like he's speaking down to retards, or you make it more grounded in realism, and therefore almost impossible for most people.[/QUOTE]
In an ideal RPG, the skills you have at your disposal and the situations that you can use them in would be diverse and flexible enough that if there any game systems you find too awkward to use, you can build your character so that they don't need them. The sad thing is that your argument makes a lot of sense because Fallout 4 conceives itself as an FPS first and an RPG second.
I don't think your choices in making conversation systems have to be immersion-shatteringly easy or impossible.(By the way, speaking to human beings in real world isn't actually that hard so I don't think the "grounded in realism and therefore impossible for most people" argument holds much water.) Deus Ex: Human Revolution's speech battles were really elegantly designed in that they were simple enough for the average person to get a hang of but still rigorous enough that you had to be attentive and thoughtful if you wanted to get the outcome you wanted. I don't think the exact system would work for Fallout but it's a useful example of a speech system that involves player skill and doesn't fall apart.
[QUOTE=Sableye;49606189]Ya but you still have to kill the institute[/QUOTE]
And even that is a bit of an asspull, it's like how you go the Institute route and you also have the ability to build up the Minutemen and be the General while also being the Director, giving you control over two organisations [sp]well, you aren't really the general... Got another settlement for ya by the way.[/sp]
But as soon as you go the full Minutemen route, it's suddenly "The Institute will die in hellfire because they attacked us like [I]once[/I]" the Minutemen literally have zero reason to have any enemies, or at least any GOOD reason, but I suppose Bethesda have to place that cookie cutter ending in, can't have a faction that doesn't end with a big bad and a giant explosion!
[QUOTE=TheRealRudy;49604546]it's pretty silly there's no wait to negotiate peace between the BoS and institute via charisma/intelligence checks or something. both factions are as old as the fucking great war itself, yet they think it's the best solution to blow each other up.
yeah that's quality writing right there bethesda.[/QUOTE]
Being able to foster peace between the BOS and the Institute would break the factions. That's just now how they work.
It's like if you could foster peace between the NCR and the Legion. That would just go against everything either factions stand for.
[editline]26th January 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=jonu67;49606325]And even that is a bit of an asspull, it's like how you go the Institute route and you also have the ability to build up the Minutemen and be the General while also being the Director, giving you control over two organisations [sp]well, you aren't really the general... Got another settlement for ya by the way.[/sp]
But as soon as you go the full Minutemen route, it's suddenly "The Institute will die in hellfire because they attacked us like [I]once[/I]" the Minutemen literally have zero reason to have any enemies, or at least any GOOD reason, but I suppose Bethesda have to place that cookie cutter ending in, can't have a faction that doesn't end with a big bad and a giant explosion![/QUOTE]
The minutemen fight for the well being and peace of the people of the commonwealth. That includes fighting raiders, mirelurks, super mutants, ghouls, and synths.
If the Institute, which is already established as a fucking massive threat to the commonwealth by using the denizens as test subjects on a regular basis and going out of their way to nip in the bud any form of advanced government, starts fucking around openly with the minutemen, you'd bet they'd react angrily and decide to wipe out one of the most feared and despised factions in the region.
In a peaceful ending, you'd probably have to carefully select who from each faction would best represent them during negotiation, to ensure no one flies off the handle and cancels the talks, or worse.
IE, you wouldn't want Maxson to be anywhere NEAR these talks, opting to appoint someone like scribe Halen using your rank in the BoS, your previous achievements and loyalties to the brotherhood, and your CHR to convince Maxson. You can also represent a faction yourself if you're trusted enough by them and don't think anyone else is a good fit.
But a peaceful ending would be out of place because this is a series about war.
The point of every single story line in every single fallout game is about how no matter how far you want to run away from conflict, war is inevitable, and war will not change its ways.
It's not as cleverly brought up in Fallout 4 as it is in New Vegas but the point is still there. You can't make peace, because peace doesn't work, shit [I]always[/I] hits the fan. In New Vegas, peaceful/"pacifist" options are always about moving the responsibility off your shoulders and onto the hands of someone else. Even if you convince the final boss to back off in New Vegas, you don't solve the war through peace, there's still hundreds of people dying right outside and you can't do anything about that.
Then don't make it the canon ending.
Just give us the option to do it.
What I mean is, in order to get that ending, you'd have to not only set a LOT of things up beforehand, everything has to go near PERFECTLY. Even one poor choice of words and it's all over.
A fittingly high-stress dialog gauntlet would be a great CHR endgame. Figure out what each faction wants, try to find a way to give them what they want without upsetting the others, and quash any unreasonable demands with CHR checks and your authority in each faction.
But it still would break the point of the story. You can try hard, and you can keep trying, but war comes. It always comes and it never changes.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49606393]The minutemen fight for the well being and peace of the people of the commonwealth. That includes fighting raiders, mirelurks, super mutants, ghouls, and synths.
If the Institute, which is already established as a fucking massive threat to the commonwealth by using the denizens as test subjects on a regular basis and going out of their way to nip in the bud any form of advanced government, starts fucking around openly with the minutemen, you'd bet they'd react angrily and decide to wipe out one of the most feared and despised factions in the region.[/QUOTE]
It's a very irregular basis and said program was shutdown and from what you learn in the Institute they attempted to aid in creating a form of government, I.E the CPG, but the one thing keeping the commonwealth from forming a government was the people of the commonwealth itself, in fighting and complete and total inability to maintain any semblance of an accord due to factional infighting and political squabbling.
The death of the CPG marked both the end of the Institute's attempt at meaningful cooperation with the surface, the surface fucked things up for themselves, the Institute gave them a chance and they squandered it, the Institute is entirely within it's rights not to give a shit anymore.
Slight progress on this. Modelling is nearly done, with the exception of the forearms and the feet and a few unfinished bits here and there. I'm now planning to do this as a direct model replacement for the X-01, but Nifskope's FO4 support is still incomplete, so this will be a while still :frown:
[t]http://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/images/1151/3038366-1453764883.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49606470]But it still would break the point of the story. You can try hard, and you can keep trying, but war comes. It always comes and it never changes.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't have to be permanent peace, no peace ever is as long as there are still two humans left on this planet. That's what "war never changes" means. What this ending would be about is "Okay, calm the fuck down, everyone. Let's take five seconds to actually fucking listen to eachother before we start slitting throats. Is there another way we can do this, at least for now?"
Keywords, [I]for now[/I]. Even if it doesn't work out ultimately (beyond the time scope of the game's story), what you're trying to do is give the people of the commonwealth enough time to either prepare themselves or flee. You're aiming to reduce casualties as much as humanly possible. This is something that has happened over and over again across all of human history, why is it so unacceptable here?
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;49606504]Slight progress on this. Modelling is nearly done, with the exception of the forearms and the feet and a few unfinished bits here and there. I'm now planning to do this as a direct model replacement for the X-01, but Nifskope's FO4 support is still incomplete, so this will be a while still :frown:
[t]http://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/images/1151/3038366-1453764883.jpg[/t][/QUOTE]
Much much better than X-01
APA > X-01 all the way
[QUOTE=Everything;49606549]It doesn't have to be permanent peace, no peace ever is as long as there are still two humans left on this planet. That's what "war never changes" means. What this ending would be about is "Okay, calm the fuck down, everyone. Let's take five seconds to actually fucking listen to eachother before we start slitting throats. Is there another way we can do this, at least for now?"
Keywords, [I]for now[/I]. Even if it doesn't work out ultimately (beyond the time scope of the game's story), what you're trying to do is give the people of the commonwealth enough time to either prepare themselves or flee. You're aiming to reduce casualties as much as humanly possible. This is something that has happened over and over again across all of human history, why is it so unacceptable here?[/QUOTE]
That'd be an incredibly underwhelming and stupid ending to be perfectly honest.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49606470]But it still would break the point of the story. You can try hard, and you can keep trying, but war comes. It always comes and it never changes.[/QUOTE]
It isn't perpetual war though. There was no war in Fallout, it was just The Master's plot which gets resolved largely before it begins. Fallout 2 isn't really about war either, though the Enclave's direct attack on Arroyo is closer to anything warlike than Fallout. If you don't have moments of peace then you just turn the series into 40K, and I don't want it to be the grim darkness of the 2200s because that kind of story telling is incredibly boring to me.
There were moments of peace though, pretty much all the way until the point where the BOS shows up and decides to wage war against the institute with a fucking zeppelin war machine.
[editline]26th January 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=RichyZ;49606652]not every ending should be a gratuitous bloodbath followed by a nuclear explosion[/QUOTE]
An ending that's literally [I]nothing[/I] would be worse.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49606470]But it still would break the point of the story. You can try hard, and you can keep trying, but war comes. It always comes and it never changes.[/QUOTE]
you are right about the themes of the story, but the problem with it in relation to fallout 4 is that the conflict itself feels unnecessary. Midway through the story a big blimp comes out from nowhere and they say they have to wage war because the codex, which we can never see, demands it. Sure, zealotry can be used as a plot device, but it's awfully shallow a motivation for fielding what seems in-universe to be hundreds of troops (not to mention feeding them, maintaining their suits, weapons, ammunition, water, medical needs, space, etc). Considering that you can actually become the leader of the institute, or at least find out you're it's leaders parent, it feels contrived you can't even try to talk to Maxson about peace. Even if he says no, that would add a lot to the story.
As for the railroad, I see absolutely no reason why they would feel it necessary to massacre the institute when by dint of following their questline you, again, become in line to lead the entire thing. You're in a position to end every problem the institute has, but you never get to do it. Even when companions call you out on being the institute's leader, you can only try to justify their actions.
The minutemen have the stupidest reason for coming to blows with the institute. The worst part is, there was a completely valid justification already in the lore, with the institute killing off the confederacy of commonwealth towns or whatever that was called. I only assume that bethesda thought the average brogamer wouldn't be able to understand a faction operating off of things they haven't seen, and slapdashed a random attack that the institute never had a reason to undergo into the product.
Honestly, fallout 4 just doesn't work on a fundamental level. The pacing is terrible, it goes from finding babby to war faster than Dusk til Dawn. The conflict itself makes no sense. The roleplaying aspect is nearly nil. I don't think there's a single quest that doesn't involve manshooting.
tl;dr, fire emil for the love of god
You can already negotiate peace between some of the factions. Being able to outright STOP the main quest from progressing by making the factions no longer angry at each other would be retarded.
You can't stop the battle of hoover dam from happening. You can't stop the master. You can't stop the enclave.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;49606678]You can't stop the battle of hoover dam from happening. You can't stop the master. You can't stop the enclave.[/QUOTE]
Thing has never happened before, therefor thing cannot ever happen.
Game storytelling as a whole wouldn't be where it is if everyone accepted that logic.
Wasn't the Hoover dam battle planned to happen regardless?
Here is just "Yup the brotherhood is here lets go to war".
[QUOTE=Everything;49606713]Thing has never happened before, therefor thing cannot ever happen.
Game storytelling as a whole wouldn't be where it is if everyone accepted that logic.[/QUOTE]
[I]But the point of fallout is that you can't stop war.[/I]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
