I really, truly, honestly meant to post this many weeks ago, so forgive me, but I've searched the archives and found no mention of it. Aeropause reports (with a consternation that I share) that
Fallout 3 might be too much shooty, not enough talky. From an interview with the devs
over on 1up:
1UP: You've mentioned that the game will have multiple endings, perhaps as many as a dozen. Without giving away any spoilers, can you explain the sorts of things that will affect which ending the player reaches? For example, will conversations affect the outcome of the game, or is it primarily larger-scale, world-shaking actions?
EP: We went back and forth with the impact of dialogue on the character, and ultimately decided we didn't want to penalize or reward the player for carrying on a conversation. What you say and how you say it will certainly affect how NPCs react to you, and whether or not they'll give you quests, but not the ending of the game. [That] really depends on some of the big decisions you make during the course of the game, as well as your karma. And your karma changes based on your actions. So [if] you destroy Megaton [a city built around a supposedly inert atomic bomb], your karma plummets, so that will certainly affect the ending. But there are other moments too, key moments during the game, that greatly determine which ending you get.
Emphasis mine.
I maintain that sequels should never be expansion packs, and that Same Shit, Different Day (SSDD) is a terrible game development model. But as much as I despise the kneejerk, nostalgia-mongering attitude of many gamers when faced with terrifying new additions to their favorite franchises (I'm looking at you, No Mutants Allowed, you bunch of cretins), the fact remains that the retention (or expulsion) of some recurring traits can make or break a sequel. Rewarding or punishing the player for conversational decisions is a fairly major part of intelligent roleplaying games. Particularly Fallout.
Now, Aeropause seems to go a wee bit overboard with their reaction to what is really a small part of a larger, more all-encompassing interview. The interviewee does state that NPCs will be affected by conversation, but doesn't particularly quantify the statement. I will wait and see. Dubiously. Steepling my fingers and raising one eyebrow.
Fallout 3 to Eschew Long Dialogue Paths [Aeropause]
UPDATE: This interview sparked a shitstorm that caused the lead designer to issue a correction here.
Contest:
5:22 AM on 09.29.2007
| 
/rant off
Also, thanks for the post. ;p
And now I am that asshole. Thanks for the post, have a good day.
Epic failure.
Conversations effect Karma...
Karma effects ending...
I think people are flipping out about nothing, they just said no specific conversations change the ending per se. It's not like all of a sudden conversations won't matter to game play or quests. It's not like all of a sudden conversations will be unimportant and useless...
This is people who are looking for every little fault in the game that means it won't live up to Fallout 1&2, but this isn't going to be our old school Fallout. With the move to an entire new form of presentation, there are without a doubt going to be changes to the basic form.
Can we at least wait for a demo/playable version till we start bashing?
PS. I am a HUGE Fallout fan and will be leading the mob to burn down Bethesda if they screw F3 up, but lets give em a chance at least!
*shrugs*
Above all, let's see the product Bethesda will release before judging too much. It does look promising so far, even if I won't spend 30 minutes navigating through a dialogue tree. Sad to say it, but the casual gamer of nowadays is dumber than in the start of the nineties. And if they want to reach the casual market and not only hardcore RPgamers, they have to do some adjustements.
But the game should still turn out great.
I'm all for good conversations in games. I read pretty much all the dialogue in KOTOR, because I wanted to see what NPC's had to say in that universe. But most standard RPGs have NPCs talk like this "Our village is under threat from <threat>. It has been so hard on <the people> <my children>. <blablabla>. Would you please help us from <threat>?".
I just skip that kind of dialogue, it never goes beyond a simple story to mask a couple of clearcut objectives. Sometimes they'll add hints to a larger conflict on larger quest in an RPG. In that case, NPC's almost always give you so many hints about the larger quest, that when you are finally told to embark on it, you could just as well skip that part of the dialogue because you already know what to do.
For example in Blue Dragon: if you skip ALL the dialogue, you would probably not miss a thing. Except for those couple of lines where they tell you where to go, while there is no logbook for quests.
Every fucking one. Regardless of whether or not it's an important plot NPC. Personally, I could do without that.
Also, direct spoilers from the dev team are the tops.
Secondly this is the new era of gaming, Fallout was designed for sub standard systems with crappy graphics and no horsepower, dialoge was the only way to lengthen a game, Dialog was the main way to create a game that had replay value and tell a story...
Now we have cut scenes and moves and scripted events that can cove alot of ground. i think its a shame they had to cut out the dialouge importance a little bit but most people just through there assholes about things that are not for certain...
In fact, I generally skip articles related to games I want to play because something like that might be spoiled. Same reason I've read hardly any Bioshock posts. It'll be awhile until I can play it and I don't want anything ruined.
1)I'm a member of the NMA forum, worked there a few days ago. Still I assure you I'm not a cretin. Really. Do take my word on that.
2)That unfortunate quote from Emil led to some controversy indeed, but Emil already put the record straight a few weeks ago.
Seems it was a misunderstanding.
All the best
to Oninusar: It actually is the same dialog system and if the destroying arcanum quest pissed you off, then being asked to destroy megaton (the first town you visit) as soon as you get there should really annoy you.
And nothing is old to us, Eliza. However, Whiteboy fails because he actually got Comment Zero, not the first post.
An interesting idea in regards to the finer details of the game, but you're really pushing the meta here. So long as during gameplay it feels like your conversations are having an affect on your character's direction, or the conclusion, then mission success!