You might have seen https://i.imgur.com/yPcC7X6.jpg already, which explains my point.

If you've wondered why there isn't an option to show full sentences, it's because then it would be obvious how poor your choices can be. With dialogue wheel, they can seem more diverse than they actually are. The player can be fooled until they replay the game.

I think http://i.imgur.com/g0UtFZg.jpg shows it much better. They may be just two examples, but that approach is apparent throughout the game. In their defence, illusion of choice is a common practice nowadays. It's weak, but it's something.

What did you expect? When your body says "I have to go to the toilet!" and ask you where you want to go? You can say "I want to go left around the table to the toilet!", "I want to go right around the table to the toilet!", "I want to go quickly to the toilet", "I want to go to the toilet!"

Because there's no such thing as not going to the toilet when you got to go!

As in New Vegas you could ask characters a lot of things about rumors, and getting to know them. Ask them where they came from. History about the settlements and or the people you meet there. Almost nearly the same in F3 a bit. I like to feel like I can have a normal conversation with these people beside going from quest to quest.

Hahahaahahahah I don't know whether I should laugh or cry with this. It took a mod for people to realize what was going on in this game, but at least this mod dispells the illusion some people wanted to be under. Maybe if enough wake up and actually show Bethesda their contempt, we might get a better FO5. Because if they keep denying the obvious and actually be content with this, the game will only devolve further.

I don't think radiant quests are the best example of dialog variety, nor relay and delivery of information.

In FO:NV That Backstreet apparel location bit, would have just been one line. Nothing else to select, other then maybe. "I have more questions." To go back to the root dialog.

The tree system is more in attempt to mimic organic conversation, and keep what ever your doing in progress.

Yes, there are some circumstances where you should have been allowed to make your characters answers more different. Like if a companion asks you how you still feel about your dead spouse, you don't have the option to really badmouth them.

I figure its driven by having a voiced character.

If a character is voiced then arguably its better not to display what they are going to say, because the player will just read it and then skip it. Equally its a lot more work to amend and change the branching dialogue options.

The problem is that both of these factors discourage branching dialogue choices, so if you like your branching quests and skillchecks then fallout 4 is a step back. For me Fallout 4 improves over Fallout 3 in almost all areas except for those. Unfortunately branching choices and skillchecks are very important to me.

Heres hoping Obsidian get a shot at a spin off. I'm curious to see what approach they would take to a fully voiced main character, or if they wouldn't take that option at all.

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1555098-would-you-like-bethesda-to-do-obscenity-stronger-in-dialogs/

My post wasnt really that relevant

I don't think that's the case. The line probably has to be newly recorded even if one or two words change, because it can change the diction and whatnot. And saving voiceover of NPCs was something applicable the previous Fallout game as well as the spin-off.

And this shows another issue with the idiot wheel.

You are nor only limited to four options, you are also required to have four options on any dialogue even then only one is needed and its probably is only one response for all options.

No its not an major issue however it cost a lot recording all the various comments.

Oh, sure. I guess the difference between the main character being voiced is that you'll actually see and read the dialogue option before its being said, then you click on it, and then its spoken - whereas thats not true of NPCs.

Actually what would be great, to get rid of the whole argument between a voice acted character and a non voice character actor. Is taking the time to develop a way for the players to speak responses to the NPCs and the NPCs be able to recognize what we were saying.

Do we have the technology to do this? Nope.

But eventually we should get to that point because I am tired of voice acted main protagonist if my dialogue is going to suffer for it.

and most of them would give you a response from a set small set of possible responses, and which unless you repeatedly went back and asked them the same question, it would make it appear as though there was 10 times as much dialog.

Not to mention that most of the time all of the 6 or 7 possible PC dialog choices you had would result in one or two responses.

I urge you to replay the previous titles. Yes not all dialog was meaningful. But that is beyond ridiculous.

In FO4 the whole game, besides some parts of the MQ and a handful of other prominent quests (not even most of them) are like that. Don't worry, as people start to use the mod, more of these will come up.

"What's wrong with that?"

"Nothing! But the way he said it was!!"

Perhaps the dialogs are simply asking whether a little more treble or bass to your voice? You know: More bass when you really really mean it seriously!

I am very well acquanted with the previous titles. Im just not looking through rose colored glasses. The responses most npc's give are pretty much just like they were in the past, there were a few notable exceptions but in general its the same.

There are technically more dialog lines in FO4 but its mostly from the voiced PC, which im meh about. I don't hate it, but its not a down grade at all. Its a lot better than it used to be in morrowind and oblivion. MW's system literally is ultra bare bones in which all most all non important npc's have the same lines that are automaticly filtered depending on their faction and where they are located. Oblvions not much better.

This is exactly it. It's to avoid redundancy. Same reason why Bioware does it, too.

But carry on with your weird, bias confirming conspiracy theories, anyway, people. It's really amusing.

Actually in the earliest adventure games you could form lines, and then there would be some key words that unlocked certain passages in the story.

You won't find any rose-colored glasses here mate. In fact, when FO3 was released, I greatly supported the transition from isometric to FPS-RPG. I only criticize sequels when I observe a drop in quality and only because I know for sure that it will continue to drop unless we all do so.

How many of these screenshots will be needed until you come to the same realization I wonder.

I actually dont have a major issue with different tonal replies. Its always been a part of CRPGs, and its a nice way to feel that you are playing your character. What I dont want is these tonal replies to become the main type of response. The issue isnt that they exist. Its whether they are replacing more meaningful replies.

In the second screenshot for example 3/4 of them are exactly in the same tone. The 3rd is slightly rude, almost the same tone as well.

That was one of my main gripes with the game from the start. It did not have a little more "extreme" tones that the previous ones had. They felt too similar and bland and I was not able to RP how I wanted to.

I think it's obvious guys, the protagonist is a synth that can't disagree with anyone.

"Jagged Alliance" were much alike "Fallout" in game genre, and they took several game genres "Text Adventure", "Map-Strategy", "Turn-based" and "First-person shooter" into one. And what really made those games top-score in being re-playable was: first that the story developed by for example giving a certain NPC a letter which then opened the dialog or it could be finding apparently useless tools in the wasteland and then figuring out that they could combine and be used etc.; and second all such possibilities were very kept secrets more than a year after game releases, that only slowly came out on forums.

If you are missing something in dialogs, it is most likely because the human mind need problems. For example at coffee-break speak with the colleagues about the buses driving on time? No, but speak about an accident that just happen, absolute! So when the game is straight forward, it doesn't puzzle the mind. How to combine stuff and make mods, it's not something you have to figure out, for example if the game had a certain item and another that you could find in the wasteland, and suddenly you figure out they can be combined into a barrel mod; players would re-play the game hundreds of times to puzzle with such and if the developers could keep it secret, but it's already straight forward.

Bla bla

Do not get this, you have four ways of saying pretty much the same.
Mostly this is about having to have 4 ways of saying hello because of stupid wheel,

its an benefit is that you can color your dialogue so it fits your character better, however this is harmed by the short visible text.

This indicates that the main reason is to always use 4 responses.

Again this puzzles me, why not only have one or two if you don't need more?