As someone who started with Fallout 3, here are my thoughts on Fallout 4

[Irwin John Finster]

I fell in love with the Fallout universe through Fallout 3. The atmosphere, music, and overall writing was great - all the DLC's were well done as well. Then I played New Vegas, which had tremendously improved writing and story. I did not like the atmosphere of the Mojave Wasteland as much as the Capital Wasteland, but everything Obsidian did with that game was wonderful and made me a lifelong Obsidian fan. Since then, I have gone and played Fallout 1 and 2 as well and gained an appreciation for a more true RPG and the top-down, isometric style as well as the more mature writing of the first two games.

When I read that Brian Fargo was making Wasteland 2 I was ecstatic and I am still in love with the Wasteland universe. The effort they put into the writing and descriptions in that game make up for the flaws. I will be playing that game several times through and hope for a Wasteland 3 in the future.

Now to Fallout 4:
After seeing what Bethesda did with Skyrim, I predicted that Fallout 4 might have extremely limited dialogue and writing. In Skyrim I became head of the entire Mages Guild directly from being an apprentice through a couple quests only. There was little depth relative to previous games in the series. The writing was generally childish in this regard compared to Morrowind or even Oblivion and dialogue options were very limited. In the same fashion, I find similar things happening in Fallout 4.

Overall, the gameplay, exploration and game world are superb. Gun-play is greatly improved and quite fun, and crafting and modding weapons is actually not as boring as it usually is in other games. These aspects would make it a perfect game if it wasn't for a certain elephant in the room...

The Elephants in the Room: The Writing, The Dialogue Wheel and Lack of Conversation Options
Whoever thought introducing both a voiced protagonist AND a dialogue wheel should have been laughed out of the room, not embraced and allowed to continue. The voice acting is so cringe-worthy that every time I find myself enjoying Fallout 4, the main character or someone else says something and I want to put the game down entirely. I think this was probably done because children do not like to read and therefore did not like RPG-level dialogue trees. Dragon Age: Origins was one of the best RPGs ever created, and then they defenestrated all that wonderful writing and dialogue by introducing a voiced protagonist and dialogue wheel in Dragon Age 2, thereby alienating a large portion of RPG fans including myself.

The writing itself is acceptable at some points and downright insulting at others. Bethesda really needs to consider hiring Obsidian/Black Isle people to write for them because the other aspects of the game are so good that the bad writing and dialogue really drag this game down.

First-Person Shooting:
This is a very fun FPS. They improved this aspect tremendously, and introduced a pretty good crafting/modding system that makes me feel like trying it. However, since they completely removed RPG dialogue options from the game, this improvement turns Fallout 4 into Borderlands 4. That is, it's a game that has great gun-play, crafting and looting without any RPG dialogue options, pretending instead that MMORPG grinds are what make singleplayer RPG experiences. If It was actually Borderlands, I'd probably give it 10/10 for being a tremendous improvement on the series. But this is Fallout, and RPG fans hate seeing the universe "streamlined" with dialogue wheels and linear stories that we have no choice in experiencing. Most of us enjoy reading, and the success of Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2, Morrowind, and other games is a testament to the demand for RPG dialogues rather than childish writing with no branching paths. Instead of a "choose your own adventure" game it's becoming Far Cry married to Borderlands. Which is an apt comparison in my opinion because Far Cry 3's Jason Brody was just as terrible as a voiced protagonist - very cringe-worthy indeed.

In conclusion, I have to force myself to enjoy this game because this is Fallout and damn it, I waited half a decade for this game. Everything is great about this game except the elephant in the room - the elimination of RPG elements turning this towards every other generic shooter that turns out good for everyone, but great for no one.

Am I enjoying myself? Yes, but I have to compromise and force myself to enjoy it. That has never happened with any of these games. Here's hoping Obsidian gets another chance to make a Fallout game and they toss that damn wheel out the window.

TL;DR
Fallout 4 would be a perfect game if they didn't strip out all of the great dialogue and RPG choices in conversations, and improved the writing. But these things make the game go from great to a solid "meh" as soon as the protagonist opens his mouth. I can only conclude that this game, like Skyrim, was made for everyone so that it was an ok game for everyone and an amazing game for no one. Is it worth a look? If you've never played an RPG or a Fallout game (including 3) you will probably think this is the deepest game you have ever played. If you know what real dialogue and conversation in RPGs are and how they contribute to world-building, you will be disappointed and have to compromise in order to enjoy Fallout 4.

Cheers.

 

[Magnus]

Hear, hear!

 

[Dr Fallout]

I can't wholly agree, but it's nice to see even Fallout 3 fans being critical. Good on you sir!

 

[shengar]

Yeah, my breaking point for this is its voiced protagonist, and the leaked limited dialogue. Voiced dialogue in RPG is truly the bane of the genre. Unless the MC is already a premade character like Geralt.

 

[TheRippaMan]

I don't know that it would be the "bane of the genre" per se, but really difficult to pull off, while at the same time, including multiple dialog branches and different types of voices to choose from. My thinking is that the time "isn't" now for voiced dialog. It costs a lot of money, takes a lot of time and, for the deep, satisfying dialog and story elements we desire, perhaps impossible to fit on a game disc.

It seems everyone is rushing to turn RPGs and games in genre into this cinematic, perhaps artsy, experience, when it's still in it's infantile stages -- not long ago we were all being dazzled by Mario and Donkey Kong on the NES.

It seems a lot of people, except the fanboys of course, are complaining about the voiced dialog in this game. From what I've seen, the guy sounds annoying.

 

[Crni Vuk]

It can create a very uncanny situation, when you create a face or character that simply doesn't fitt to the voice you hear with the voice you have in your head. Not to mention that a voice can be a very huge limitation, like an intoxicated character, or a character who's stuttering, speaking with accent etc. something that is easy to write - form the tone - is a lot harder to pull of with a voice.

 

[Irwin John Finster]

Yeah, my breaking point for this is its voiced protagonist, and the leaked limited dialogue. Voiced dialogue in RPG is truly the bane of the genre. Unless the MC is already a premade character like Geralt.

I agree entirely. I play Bioshock, Metro, or The Witcher to get immersed in someone else's pre-made character. I go to Bethesda to play as my own character, and their failed attempt at writing a voiced-protagonist breaks my immersion every time he speaks. It's offensive how bad it is, because I'm loving Fallout 4 one minute - exploring, taking in the world - and the next this terrible voice-actor (seriously, he's AWFUL) reminds me that no, I am not my character I am Bethesda's generic daddy character who gets all emotional and screams "WHERE IS MY SON?!" in the most forced way possible. It's as if they're in the room slapping me in the face yelling "YOUR CHARACTER IS UPSET NOW"

So childish. Considering how tough the job market is for many people, I honestly am upset people got paid for this writing.

 

[shengar]

Yeah, my breaking point for this is its voiced protagonist, and the leaked limited dialogue. Voiced dialogue in RPG is truly the bane of the genre. Unless the MC is already a premade character like Geralt.

I agree entirely. I play Bioshock, Metro, or The Witcher to get immersed in someone else's pre-made character. I go to Bethesda to play as my own character, and their failed attempt at writing a voiced-protagonist breaks my immersion every time he speaks. It's offensive how bad it is, because I'm loving Fallout 4 one minute - exploring, taking in the world - and the next this terrible voice-actor (seriously, he's AWFUL) reminds me that no, I am not my character I am Bethesda's generic daddy character who gets all emotional and screams "WHERE IS MY SON?!" in the most forced way possible. It's as if they're in the room slapping me in the face yelling "YOUR CHARACTER IS UPSET NOW"

So childish. Considering how tough the job market is for many people, I honestly am upset people got paid for this writing.

I don't know that it would be the "bane of the genre" per se, but really difficult to pull off, while at the same time, including multiple dialog branches and different types of voices to choose from. My thinking is that the time "isn't" now for voiced dialog. It costs a lot of money, takes a lot of time and, for the deep, satisfying dialog and story elements we desire, perhaps impossible to fit on a game disc.

It seems everyone is rushing to turn RPGs and games in genre into this cinematic, perhaps artsy, experience, when it's still in it's infantile stages -- not long ago we were all being dazzled by Mario and Donkey Kong on the NES.

It seems a lot of people, except the fanboys of course, are complaining about the voiced dialog in this game. From what I've seen, the guy sounds annoying.

It is not the bane of the genre before. Many will point to Shephard from Mass Effect as a better example of customizable voiced protagonist, me Included. But Shepard isn't your usual customizable RPG protagonist. Shepard is actually a pre-made character, basically Geralt with customizable face. It is clear that Shepard fits nicely with the type of protagonist that Geralt in as Shepard have limited spectrum of personality and trait. You can't play as idiot Shepard who rise through sheer luck, or pacifist Shepard that refuse kill anything, relying on non-lethal combat measure, or charismatic-cowardly Shepard who let the lackeys to their job. Shepard is a hard veteran who can deal problem with a bit of diplomacy and lot of gunfight, and it's depend on the player which aspect that Shepard will focused on their gameplay.

This is where Bethesda got their misuderstanding. Their main character is practically a blank slate. You can play as the bumbling idiot or as the fragile genius as the game does not give you any implication of any limitation to that. But giving this main character a voice actually already gives the player an implication of limitation. Actually, if we look much into the main character, they already have so much background information that would actually limiting the player roleplay option. The husband is from millitary, so you obviously can't play as someone who only have one strength, and so does the same with the wife as a lawyer definitely shouldn't be able to receive her degree with only a single digit of IQ. So perhaps Bethesda already know this, but since their design objective is to please the player as much as possible, they try to hide such limitation under the guise of blank slate character, resulting in a very jarring moment when someone actually try to roleplay (This is yet another oxymoronic Bethesda design as the protagonist from FO3 also have so much background information that actually limits the player ability to roleplay, yet they disguise the character as a blank slate).

On an unrelated note, Bioware also made the same misunderstanding with Dragon Age Inquisition, giving a voice to highly customizable main characters, causing many to people criticizes the blandness of the main character.