Fallout should have a voiced protagonist?
Debate Rounds (3)
Well I will be the first one to admit that a voiced protagonist if done right can be a mighty tool to tell a emotional story. But I think I speak for the whole rp community when I say it does not belong in the Fallout franchise and the reason is pretty simple really.
A voiced protagonist means that it will be less of your own story. A excellent example is this let's play " https://www.youtube.com...;.
This right here is the perfect example that support my argument. You can't make a character like this in fallout 4. Period.
A voiced protagonist will also make a big impact on how much you play the game.
In several games like fallout NV or Skyrim I could replay those games several times, each new time with a brand new character. In Fallout 4 it would be boring to play it several times because it would pretty much be the same character.
In mass effect you could choice how you would wanna play the game. One time I played a nice guy, another a mean guy but I still played Shepard. Yes I picked up different lines and maybe punished a news reporter in one of the game styles but it did still not make a mass effect on me. I understand that Fallout plays differently than Mass effect but you know what I'm getting at.
Fallout has always been about your story, your character.
Well that is my argument for this round. It will be fun to see if someone actually votes on this after we are done.
A character voiced by another person may very well still be your character. Look at games like Mass Effect and Saints Row; characters hand-crafted by the player, but brought to life by voice. Fallout shows you what you'll say, but the interpretation of those lines will lend greatly to the strength of the character. What a voice means is that a character we designed may still surprise us, which makes them more endearing. Maybe once people did, but few care for Gordon Freeman these days.
I've played nearly every Fallout game. (haven't yet played Shelter), and I think that assertion has a mistake to it. Fallout is not about you: it's about the world and your effect on it. Fallout 1 was about discovering the wasteland, finding towns and ruins and uncovering the mystery of the Master. There was a halfway point where you could return to previous areas only to find them burned by super mutants from the Master's army. You shaped the wasteland, but rarely were you addressed for it. Much like Mad Max, you did the work and slinked off to let the other characters show their stories.
Fallout 2 is about returning to a land shaped by the Vault Dweller, seeing the effects of their efforts decades ago, rediscovering new areas and finding out about the true nature of the Vaults. You were not the focal point, just a handyman/woman.
Fallout 3, even while following you from birth to death, still has you following in the footsteps of others: meeting figures and deciding to help or hinder them, it's still their stories you follow.
New Vegas has you literally following Benny and delving into the power struggle for the Mojave, and you have to be deranged (ie; me trying to sneak past the deathclaws) to not take the designated path.
Fallout offers an excellent roleplaying sandbox since it offers you dialogue options, a vast world and great customization, but I think that this would only be helped by good voice acting. The best lines in the games are from voiced characters; even back in the original one. Imagine if the Terrifying Presence or Black Widow lines were animated. You could always roleplay as a silent figure, but that will leave your character rather blank, since their delivery will always be flat.
See you next round,
Darkrock999 forfeited this round.
You say that Fallout was about the world and the players effect on it. I agree with you, but I will also add that Fallout is in fact about the player too IF you so choice.
I brought up an example. It is a let's play on youtube and if you watch a bit of it you will notice that it is about the character that the player created.
Fallout is a roleplay game and roleplaying games is about taking controll of a character (your character) and see how he fits into the world that he exist in.
You say that voice acting can make people feel more for the characters and I agree. I had strong emotional feelings in the end of a certain rockstar game. But I must mention a few things here.
Nobody does really care about Gordon freeman. I once again agree but you can't compare your fallout character and Gordon freeman.
Of course nobody care for him! Gordon don't have personality. Your character often does if you think trough what character you want to make.
I once played with a character that does not like to kill people. I remember him and the memories we shared because it was an fun character. Imagine that kind of character in a world crazy as fallout. Ahhh memories.
Also my character was not really silent.
Really sorry for forfeiting the last round by the way. If I start a debate I should take the responsibility and be on every round.
It is possible to still roleplay as a character with voice: it can even strengthen the personality of the character. You can play Morrowind and (literally) write a full paragraph on the backstory of your character and their powers, but this never materializes in game, save for the choices you make. The issue here is that because your character speaks only through text, then they have no defined tone of voice and to anyone but the creator, they lack presence. Think of Geralt from the Witcher series, or Shepard from the Mass Effect series. They are shaped by us; we decide their appearance, their backstory and what they say and do. Even so, they can still surprise us. When the player decides to take a Renegade choice and Shepard punches a reporter; when the player as Geralt chooses to warn an npc who's pushing their luck, Geralt changes the dialogue but keeps the tone and message intact. Not all roleplay must be from the first person to be immersive.
For Rockstar as an example, you can have both the three voiced protagonists, but also create your own character from their looks to their skills and grow them. But what happens is that since you're a mute, you actually have less say in things even though the character is yours; you can do nothing but emotes.
Gordon Freeman is one of the most iconic figures in first person shooters. His personality is just implied through the reactions of others. You can make small decisions along the way of his journey, from exploring to saving rebels to finding the elusive G-Man. However, the very fact that you miss his personality is evidence enough that a character without voice is without character, and to add dialogue in post is to miss the audio aspect of a personality.
A character that does not like to kill people in a fallout game. I'm afraid to say you'll get very little mileage out of him save for when you murmur to yourself what he would say as a fight kicks off. But you don't have to be the voice of someone to roleplay as them: rather, being brought around to the perspective of a character you helped shape; having a character you designed redesign you: that is the mark of stronger roleplay. And to achieve that strength, the character needs wiggle room outside of green text boxes; they need to be able to bend the rules in order to reach out the player.
Without a text box, the protagonist cannot communicate with the npcs around them in the game. But without a voice; they cannot communicate to the player, and if Fallout 4 lost its voice, it wouldn't be the game players fell in love with all those years ago. The protagonist couldn't speak before because it was a constraint of the game: imagine a Fallout where the phrase "War, war never changes" was never said.
Don't worry about missing a round; but I'd recommend that you make debates with five rounds to allow for problems like this, as well as proper breathing room for rebuttal. Until then, I'll see you all next debate,
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.