Well if you have to use the lower end dialogue if you don't meet the requirement, I can't imagine it would be too stupid. I imagine it would just be average intelligence vs. above average.

Well if you can stay alive live and go through Rigor mortis, yeah.

There are a few reasons for including this:

* In the same way that a locked safe beyond your Lockpicking skill indicates, it lets the player know that there's an option here.
* Some of the NPC responses to low skill checks can be pretty entertaining.

I also do want to clarify what is meant by "no penalty for failure". All it means is that you won't wind up in a worse position than you were before selecting it. If a dude bursts in and is intent on killing you, he's still going to want to kill you if you fail the Speech check to talk him out of it.

Ah fair enough, thanks for clearing that up, as it does make sense.

.. So what is the word on Power Armour my good man ?

...

+ More skill influences on conversation
+ hardcoe mode which seems to focus on resource management and survival
+ Being a courier, or a more politically neutral existence in FO world involved in various factions

There seem to be more choices for silver-tongued characters, which makes story-focused FO fan like me happy. As such a fan, big minus is:

- Both karma and reputation are tracked. If I'm reading it right there's separate reputations for each of the settlements, as in 1 and 2.

I think there should be only reputation system, which reflects the judgments on the PC from in-world characters rather than karma which is the judgments on the PC from the designers. I mean, even Bioware dropped their good/evil reputation system. Why should Obsidian stick to it?

Also, as a side note, I'm bit worried if they will be able to achieve both the sense of survival in the wilderness and political conflicts at the same time since they are basically mutually exclusive considering the reality of the demographic in the setting.

So.... are we gonna have dumb character dialogue? Because that would be awesome. :mohawk:

Past main characters have been through a lot worse...

My guess is that it is hard coded into the FO3 engine.

I agree on the karma thing. In my opinion, it's bogus and it wouldn't hurt to get rid of it. Reputation is the way to go.

You mean something dumber than Fallout 3's dialogue?

Even if you are right, can't they set the value related with it to 0 and forget? I liked the early draft of Jefferson, or the Black Hound since I thought the system is more akin to FO, where the morality is more ambiguous rather than in the black and white D&D world. I know it's too ambitious, though.

I didn't have any complaints. But the people who did were all complaining about things they had the ability to control without it being imposed from outside. and they couldn't. so they whined and whined and whined for two years and then they came up with hardcoe mode.

Except the existence of karma makes it possible to be good or evil. Granted it could be implemented better but is still necessary to draw a line between good and evil.

Just to be perfectly clear: Traps won't explode in our faces anymore?

It's true that a lot of people have modded in those features, but a lot of the things in hardcoe mode are also things that I personally wanted to play the game with. I realize not everyone does, but it's the only way I play it.

I like this twist on dialogue options for the low/high int skills - very nice touch.

So far this sounds wonderful!

My point is that I don' like to be judged by good or evil by the designers. Of course, NPCs with their own views are a different story.


My only worry is if it fits the populated Vegas...


Er...it's just the return of the classic except that it is welcomed one.

he means low intelligence will be shown on your dialog choices and things like that.

Any info on if it uses Facegen or something?

I don't think you're going to have a conversation with a trap.

:lol:

You people keep giving me good laughs on a hungover Saturday night.

I'm not so sure. Doing the 'good thing' may end up hurting more people in the long run. Let's say you killed a tyrant, but now there's a political vacuum and anarchy, and more people are suffering. Letting him live, despite him being incredibly corrupt and thoroughly despicable, may lead to the community he represents thriving and a lot of lives improving as a result. Which is good or evil there?

I like the absence of a karma system, because it doesn't force someone else's perception of good on you or your character. The game can never accurately judge your intentions. I may be a thoroughly awful human being. But I know that blowing up a town for a small amount of cash isn't going to help my long term prospects, as I could easily be forever known as responsible for deaths of, uh, dozens. But if I disarm the bomb, I'm lauded with praise and my personal opportunities are increased manifold.

All power to ya!



QFT.

I might buy this single issue when it comes statewide. I really want to see the hot lil super mutant mama. :3